UC Davis to hold candlelight vigils to honor victims By: Talia Kennedy Posted: 4/20/07 The gunman who shot and killed 32 students at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University on Monday was identified this week as Cho Seung-Hui, 23, a senior English student at the university. On Wednesday, NBC News reported receiving videos and a letter from Cho, sent between the time Cho shot and killed two students in an on-campus residence hall Monday morning and when he gunned down 30 more people before turning his weapon on himself. "You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience," said Cho in one video, in which he is shown brandishing firearms, a hammer and other weapons. "Thanks to you, I die like Jesus Christ to inspire generations of the weak and the defenseless people. "You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off," he said. Published reports have said Cho was receiving mental-health services, but that they were not provided by Virginia Tech. He was also accused of making unwanted phone calls and sending unwanted instant messages to two fellow students in 2005, but both declined to press charges. A professor said he made students in her class uncomfortable with his violently themed writing and by taking photographs of female students from under the desks in the classroom. A counselor once recommended Cho be committed to a mental-health facility on an involuntary basis, but a judge denied the request, saying Cho was not a danger to himself or others. In the aftermath of the shootings, universities across the country have scheduled prayer vigils to honor the fallen Virginia Tech students and faculty members. The Cal Aggie Christian Association held a prayer vigil on campus Wednesday to honor the Virginia Tech victims, and two more services are scheduled for today. The UC Davis student assistants to the chancellor, Hayley Steffen and Alfredo Arredondo, along with ASUCD officials, will host a candlelight vigil today at 7 p.m. at the Memorial Union Patio. Attendees will observe a moment of silence, and time will be designated to reflect on Monday's events. A second candlelight service and prayer vigil will begin today at 7:30 p.m. at the Chabad House, at 321 Russell Blvd. across the street from the northern edge of the UC Davis campus. The event is hosted by Chabad of Davis, an organization that promotes the Jewish faith. Students who would like to discuss their reactions to the Virginia Tech shootings should contact UC Davis' Counseling and Psychological Services at 752-0871 or visit its office in 219 North Hall. Any suspicious activity on campus should be reported to the UC Davis Police Department by calling 9-1-1 from campus phones or 752-1230 from any phone. -- Original Source:The California Aggie - April 20, 2007
A different perspective on the Virginia Tech shootings By: Brian Hanley Posted: 4/19/07 My time here at UC Davis comes after spending years in Central Asia. This tragedy at Virginia Tech is uniquely America of this era, but it is not unique in terms of death. It is most unique in the utter divorce from any apparent meaningful social grouping for the young perpetrator. The city where I ran an office had seen two civil wars. I have walked by multiple flaming barricades with flames leaping 30 feet in the air, quietly acting the part of someone who belonged there. I have watched events develop of many kinds, and employed staff who grew up playing games as young boys of counting the most dead bodies. Our office was in a fairly secure building, where men with AK-47s sat in a pillbox built in the lobby. I know of an incident where young men attacked an apartment in broad daylight with hand grenades and guns, but in a gallows humor twist worthy of "South Park," they were defeated by the mothers inside who had lived through the wars. Living in a place where beheading, kidnapping and simple murder as well as accidentally being caught in crossfire was as real a possibility as being hit by a car while crossing the street, I have thought about such violence. In another time and place, perhaps this man would have joined a violent political movement, or maybe he would have joined the gangster army of a warlord intent on enriching himself and accruing fabulous power. In another time and place, perhaps he would have been a willing recruit to drive a truck bomb into a crowd, cloaking himself in some convenient ideology, hopeful that in his dying, he would further the cause of sparking wider war. Such is an atavistic hate-filled impulse to destroy. But underneath it is more than this. It is also fueled at a deeper level by a very personal, desperate impulse to make a mark upon the world, to "be somebody." This is something we should remember when we look at CNN and see truck bombs or similar things. There is not so great a distance as we might think. And the character of those who do such things does not much resemble noble purpose. In part, such violence abroad can be political. And sometimes there comes a wider support in a culture which forms a larger armed movement. The fundamental fuel for wider support is ideology; it is not economics, nor is it even oppression. Couple that with cruelty and willingness to discipline an organization in the manner of any successful gangster and there it is. But always, in any culture, there are young men on the fringe such as this one. In another time and place such men can be made the pawns of cleverer men to do horrific things, and die believing in their place in history. I say this because I think that it can help us to understand better something about seemingly different violence others sometimes face. -- Original Source:The California Aggie - April 19, 2007
By: Rob Olson Posted: 4/19/07 This is how it happens, a tragedy so great that if we were to truly comprehend it, we would find ourselves incapacitated with grief. Speeches, national debates, 24-hour news channels, investigations, prayers and vigils. Feelings of confusion, anger, sorrow, despair. Politicians and community leaders across the nation issuing statements with identical tones and meanings. The same words appear in every one: tragedy, grief, horrific, shock, violence prevention, counseling services, thoughts and prayers, and so on. We go through the same motions and emotions. We find the old familiar paths in our minds that we've tread before with other instances of mindless slaughter: Columbine, the Amish schoolhouse shootings, people going postal at work. At least 9/11 and other terror attacks were part of some greater war of ideologies, a "clash of civilizations," as historian Samuel P. Huntington has dubbed it. This was about nothing. It had no larger purpose, no thought or reason, none of the usual gains for the perpetrator, like money or power. This was evil in its purest, most basic form. Evil for the sake of evil. Killing for the sake of killing. I write a political column. So what's my political angle? The abhorrent way some in the world community have spun the tragedy, with the Italian Il Manifesto newspaper calling it "as American as apple pie"? A vessel to expand the debate on gun rights versus gun control in America? No, I don't feel up to the task of such columns. They feel like hollow diversions in the face of such an atrocity. I want to take no political angle. Politics is about division and conflict. A tragedy of this magnitude should not be used for political debate; not yet, anyway. I don't know if justice can be done to the topic, or if I have the capability to address the worst school shooting in United States history. But here I write, attempting to describe the indescribable. How naive of me. Sueng-Hui Cho, 23, killed 32 people on the Virginia Tech campus and then turned one of his guns on his own face. His rampage was probably inspired by an argument with an ex-girlfriend, who may have gotten a new boyfriend. She was the first of his victims. It seems Cho simply lost it, just like the killers at Columbine, and hated the world so much that he sought to do as much damage as possible before ending his own life. Killing so many people without a logical motive required a ruthless mixture of hatred, insanity and, as one friend pointed out to me, selfishness. The terrible truth that no one talks about is that we really have little power to prevent these occurrences. Supposedly a number of people around this psychopath were afraid of what he might do, and referred him to counseling and to authorities. At first glance, people around him acted correctly in response to various warning signs. But only so much could be done, and it wasn't enough. We rely on some sense of sanity from our fellow man that stops us from doing what Cho did. When that is gone, when sheer malevolence and bloodlust find home in someone's heart, what are we to do? How can atrocities like what happened at Virginia Tech be prevented from occurring on our own campus? Usually these catastrophes are headed off, but other times they slip through, and all we can do is pick up the pieces, and mourn those lost to us forever in this world. But when we "pick up the pieces," we have one overriding but unspoken goal in mind: to restore faith in our own humanity. When we hear of what Cho did, we no longer believe in ourselves and in our species as inherently good, and we are compelled to respond. We cannot let Cho have the final word. That's why the politicians make their pronouncements of grief, why we write our columns, congregate for our vigils and join our Facebook groups that reach thousands of members before the first day is even over. The tragedy of Virginia Tech isn't a political debate, but a debate on the soul of humanity. No wonder we feel it so keenly. You lose, Cho. Humanity wins. -- Original Source:The California Aggie - April 19, 2007
By: Zach Kun Lin Han Posted: 4/19/07 The massacre at Virginia Tech gripped the nation the way Hollywood films always do. Except that it wasn't a film. The slayings were real, brutal and heartless. And while the gunman shot "randomly," it was also with an unmistakable precision. Death is always a surreal event. It marks the natural conclusion of a unique cycle, which, like birth, isgrotesque and beautiful in equal measure. Yet when death is inflicted by force, we can never speak of the unspeakable loss and can never express the torment a victim experienced during that brush with mortality. For some, it might be an endless eternity; for others, a fleetingly swift one. And for those who fell during that battle, through tributes and condolences we remember and commemorate the memories they left. During these times, we mourn and grieve with empathy for the victims. Our roles as part of the community become especially magnified, and our responses become a warning that such behavior of acting upon others is a behavior nobody tolerates. Nonetheless, where does the Virginia Tech massacre leave us? It is important to understand the reasons why the massacre occurred in the first place. Cho Seung-Hui has frequently been described by his peers as a socially isolated individual. Twice, his professors were shocked by the severity of the plays he composed, in which he described certain themes of revenge and bloodlust in graphic detail. And he acted as a result of societal disillusionment. The moral collapse of "what he considered the more privileged students on campus" was cited as the underlying motivation behind his actions. The signs were there, but it wasn't acted upon sufficiently enough, due to both external as well as internal factors. This shouldn't be a blame game about responsibilities, though. From a national perspective, the blame game about gun-possession merits reverberates even louder. It seems fatalistic to conclude that the event was an inevitable conclusion of a gun-toting policy, yet the tragedy was always a possible consequence of weapons possession. Others have questioned the long delay of immediate action being taken to identify the cause of the problem, which would have possibly allowed for more stringent security measures. More recent revelations have revealed that investigators were misled by a bad lead, hence the lag time of two hours between the first killings and the rest. Yet in a sprawling, large campus such as Virginia Tech, it would arguably have been difficult for instant prevention policies to be successfully implemented at such short notice, but action was still necessary. Moreover, Seung-Hui's nationality also meant that fears of future possible racial recriminations against the Korean and Asian community have been expressed. Yet it is foolhardy to shift the blame onto one race simply because of this incident. Emotions do not choose, irrespective of race or nationality. Violence, a frightening product born out of various factors, can overwhelm regardless of one's status, wealth or privilege. It is heartwarming though, to hear about the character and bravery displayed by those who acted selflessly in trying to protect their fellow brethren while in the knowledge that they might fall in the process: "Students said Professor Liviu Librescu had blocked the door to his classroom to prevent the gunman from entering." Professor Librescu fell, but for his courage he was anointed by President Bush as the first hero of the Virginia Tech massacre. And many of the victims were souls who never got to live longer than they deserved, and their actions are reminders that we all have the capacity to do good during the most crucial moments. The fundamental unity of this diverse nation is built on trust. And, while the gory Virginia Tech events have been appalling, it is during these times that we should all gather together as a people, and look toward solving what has become our challenge. -- Original Source:The California Aggie - April 19, 2007
By: Jenny Pedersen Posted: 4/18/07 Let's be honest: this isn't my original column. I was up late last night scribbling down something about "relationship people" and trying to finish a paper. Like most of us I didn't get enough sleep, I woke up late and barely rolled into lecture. In spite of the usual college stresses, I still managed to start smiling after my morning latte. However, all things changed once I read the morning news. In the state of Virginia, lattes are not enough to make anyone smile. I've been to Virginia; it's where my favorite high school history teacher grew up, and one of my best friends attends a college two hours north of Virginia Tech. The state was green, the people were friendly and I had an amazing fudge sundae at a place called Shoney's. Virginia Tech has been described as a quiet place where not much happens. It is an agricultural school in a small town similar to Davis and the school website shows pictures of students feeding large groups of mallard ducks just like the ones that patrol our own campus. We both have slightly ridiculous mascots - we're the UC Davis Aggies and they're the Virginia State Hokies. We have The California Aggie and they have The Collegiate Times. Much like us, students online discuss the lack of nightlife options in the mountain town of Blacksburg, Va. and jokingly point out that the town doubles in size when school is in session. Instead of an annual Picnic Day, in Virginia they host the International Street Fair each April. I imagine before yesterday Hokie students could easily have complained about bored Blacksburg cops breaking up their parties, citing them for noise violations and other such superfluous things, just like we were probably ecstatic about the start of spring because nobody knows what to do with themselves in a small town when it's cold. They're college students just like us in a community much like ours. They had no idea that this would change for them on any other Monday morning in April. The last time I checked, 32 people were killed; two outside of residence halls and 30 inside classrooms. The students of Virginia Tech experienced a violation of their safety in the worst way. They lost friends and faculty on their campus, in their classrooms, at their college, the place they go to gain skills for their future, to learn the tools that will help them for the rest of their lives. Education is what we hope will make the world a safer place; it is an institution we count on to protect us and our children from the likes of global warming and terrorism. The parents who lost children to the shooting probably thought there was no safer place in the world for their children to be than attending school in a small town in the United States. They weren't serving in Iraq, or living in "crime-ridden" big cities, and still they were not entirely safe. I'm not saying that we should all be paranoid and I have no suggestions for preventing school violence. What I am saying is that as fellow students we have a certain responsibility to the memory of those lost at Virginia State. If only for the rest of this week I want to acknowledge this responsibility and show appreciation for a campus that hasn't known fear or violence. I'm going to smile at strangers, students and staff because they are happy, healthy and here. I'm going to appreciate that the last time I talked to my mother it was to ask her about tax forms and not to tell her that I was injured in open fire. I'm going to appreciate that because I live and breathe, I have the luxury of fighting with my roommates and procrastinating on Facebook. Most importantly I'm appreciating the fact that it still only takes a latte to make me smile. -- Original Source:The California Aggie - April 18, 2007
UC Davis responds to Virginia Tech shootings
Officials discuss emergency notification systems By: Talia Kennedy Posted: 4/17/07 Editor's note: Monday's shootings at Virginia Tech marked the deadliest act of violence on a college campus in American history. Here, The California Aggie provides information on the shootings and responses from the UC Davis campus community. When an unidentified gunman entered the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University on Monday morning and opened gunfire, killing two students in a residence hall, the news instantly made national headlines - but the 25,000 students enrolled at the Blacksburg, Va. college were not notified of the incident until hours later, when dozens more had been injured or killed, reports said. At about 7:15 a.m. in Virginia, the gunman entered a residence hall on campus, fatally wounding two students. According to reports, the campus community was not notified of the incident because university officials believed it to be an isolated event. "We knew we had two people shot," said Wendell Flinchum, a Virigina Tech police officer, at a press conference Monday afternoon. "We secured the building. We secured the crime scene. We acted on the best information we had at the time." About two hours later, the gunman returned, this time to Norris Hall, an academic building on the opposite side of the campus. It was here where the gunman reportedly lined students up against a wall, shooting them all. By noon California time, 33 were confirmed dead and at least 22 were reported injured. The shooter, whose identity had not been determined by press time, was found dead among his victims, apparently due to a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head, according to reports. In the hours after the shootings, universities across the country began showing their support for the Virginia Tech victims, including the University of California. In a statement released Monday, UC President Robert Dynes said, "Shock and horror only begin to describe our reactions at the University of California to the terrible events that have unfolded today at Virginia Tech. Our hearts go out to the families of those whose lives have been lost, and our prayers are with those who have been wounded physically and emotionally by today's campus shootings. "All of our campuses will be reviewing again their safety programs and procedures in light of today's events, and as we learn more about the specific circumstances of the Virginia Tech shootings, we will apply those lessons as well," he said. "We take these issues extremely seriously and will continue working to provide the safest possible environment for our students, faculty and staff." The Virginia Tech killings marked the deadliest act of violence on a college campus in U.S. history. In 1966, Charles Whitman shot 16 people from the 28th floor of a clock tower at the University of Texas before he was shot and killed by campus police. Eight years ago this Friday, two students shot 12 of their peers and one teacher before turning their guns on themselves at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo. "Clearly, university campuses are not immune from the threats of violence that exist in our broader society," Dynes wrote in his statement, and that includes UC Davis. On Dec. 14, 2004, Martin Louie Castro Soriano, 26, who was seen loitering near the Regan Hall residence halls in Segundo, was reported as a suspicious person to the UC Davis Police Department. When three officers responded and attempted to calm Soriano with three Taser shots, he opened fire. The officers returned fire, shooting and killing Soriano, who died at the scene. It was later determined that the man had been under the influence of methamphetamine and marijuana at the time of the shooting, but his death was the first officer-involved shooting on the UC Davis campus. On Jan. 18, senior mathematics student Glenn Kirkpatrick was arrested by campus police after 9-1-1 callers reported seeing a man with a rifle in the Mathematical Sciences Building. Though Kirkpatrick's rifle was a rubber replica he used as a Reserve Officers' Training Corps student, the report prompted the lockdown of two campus buildings. Lisa Lapin, UC Davis' assistant vice chancellor for university communications, said UC Davis has a police force well-trained to respond to emergencies of any kind. "Our police are trained in rapid-response to exactly this kind of thing," she said. "Our police department is like any that would serve a city. That helps us respond to any kind of crisis. "However, we are pretty much an open, public campus," she said. Lapin said emergency plans are in place for UC Davis, but the campus' emergency notification systems are not yet efficient. Students at Virginia Tech were not notified by e-mail of the initial shootings on campus until hours after they took place. "We have a system that can dial all campus phone numbers, but it takes three hours," she said. "We can also send e-mails to everyone, but it also takes three hours." Lapin said UC Davis police officers would immediately evacuate students and other campus community members susceptible to a threat. She also said the university is in the process of obtaining a new emergency notification system that would be able to instantly send messages to cell phones, landline phones, Blackberrys and pagers. Lapin also said several UC Davis faculty members are connected to Virginia Tech. Mark McNamee, a former dean of what used to be the Division of Biological Sciences at UC Davis, left the university after 26 years of service to take a position as provost of Virginia Tech in 2001, she said. Michael Parella, an assistant dean in UC Davis' College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, is an alumnus of Virginia Tech. He was scheduled to accept an alumni award at the school this Friday, Lapin said, and Brad Fenwick, a former American Council on Education fellow at UC Davis, is currently the vice president for research at Virginia Tech. "Our hearts go out to [them]," she said. In the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings, some UC Davis students expressed varying reactions. "It doesn't really affect how I feel here," said sophomore managerial economics major McKenzie Bryan. "[It's] tragic, [but] it's very uncommon. I'm much more likely to die from a shark attack or lightning. "I really believe that if we did not have 'gun-free zones' or really strict gun control, there could have been people on that campus that could have stopped the shooter right after he got started, way before the SWAT teams got there," he said. "[But] no, I don't feel any more unsafe. Nothing's really changed." In a statement released to the entire UC Davis campus community, Chancellor Larry Vanderhoef reminded students to be aware of their environment. "Be sensitive to your surroundings and report any suspicions to the campus police department," he wrote. "Be familiar with campus policies related to emergency response. Bookmark the campus's homepage (ucdavis.edu), and emergency services webpage (ucdavis.edu/help/emergency_services.html), where breaking news related to emergencies on campus will be posted. With your help, we can best ensure the continued safety and wellbeing of all members of our campus community." Students who would like to discuss their reactions to the Virginia Tech shootings should contact UC Davis' Counseling and Psychological Services at 752-0871 or visit its office in 219 North Hall. Any suspicious activity on campus should be reported to the UC Davis Police Department by calling 9-1-1 from campus phones or 752-1230 from any phone. -- Original Source:The California Aggie - April 17, 2007
Program from April 16th Memorial Dedication, August 19, 2007
Front and back of the program for April 16th Memorial Dedication, August 19, 2007. The text on the program reads: "In the hours following the April 16 tragedy, the student-driven volunteer organization Hokies United placed 32 Hokie Stones on the Drillfield. The semi-circle of stones became a place to gather, to mourn, and to reflect, and the poignant display inspired today's memorial. As a community, we dedicate 32 engraved Hokie Stones in honor and in memory of the members of our Hokie family who lost their lives. Hokie Stone has long symbolized the foundation of Virginia Tech. Now, it also symbolizes our relentless spirit, our courage to move forward, and our determination never to forget."
By: George Henson, ghenson@smu.edu Posted: 4/26/07 No matter how much we try to make sense out of the horrific events of Monday, April 16, we can't. Last Wednesday, under the guise of news reporting, NBC pimped the "manifesto" and video that the Virginia Tech assassin FedEx-ed the network during the two-hour gap between the first and second shootings. "The Today Show" last Thursday morning hyped the same video footage, feigning that journalistic imperative outweighed tabloid sensationalism. For all intents and purposes, the morning infotainment show was co-hosted by a deranged murderer. It was journalistic pornography. Sideshow journalism. Capitalism. I don't know who's worse-them or us. The pornographers or those of us who consume their pornography. To their credit, the students of Virginia Tech ordered all media off their campus by Monday. The question still remains: do we really want to allow a for-profit infotainment corporation to be the voice of our national conscience? Throughout history, poets have given a voice to the tragic events that marked the time in which they lived. In 1865, Whitman's "When Lilacs Last in the Door-yard Bloom'd" gave voice to the assassination of President Lincoln. In 1922, the American modernist poet T.S. Eliot published "The Waste Land," gave voice to the chaos following World War I, the irrationality of modern society, the age-old theme of the universe in chaos. That's how many have felt during the last week. The first three lines of the first canto, "The Burial of the Dead," read, "April is the cruelest month, breeding / Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing / Memory and desire, stirring / Dull roots with spring rain." Those lines are especially poignant now - in the wake of the Virginia Tech tragedy. If you've never read the poem, it's worth a read. Don't worry if you find the language difficult or the references obscure, let the imagery speak to you. You'll be surprised how much clarity - context - the poem will lend to the horrific murders. April, it turns out, has truly been a cruel month in our nation's history: On April 12, 1861, Confederate forces attacked Fort Sumpter, South Carolina, igniting a civil war that tore apart the fabric of our country and killed over 600,000 Americans. Four years and two days later, on April 14, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated at Ford's Theatre. In fact, when Eliot wrote that "April is the cruelest month," he was referencing, at least tangentially, the assassination of President Lincoln. Eliot understood the paradox of death in April, a month that normally symbolizes hope and the renewal of life. On April 4, 1968, in Memphis, Tenn., Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. On April 19, 1995, the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City was bombed, killing 168 men, women and children. Two years earlier, to the day, the FBI siege of the Branch Davidian compound outside Waco resulted in the deaths of an estimated 79 people. Timothy McVeigh, who was executed for the Oklahoma City bombing, said that the Waco siege was a motive for the bombing. On April 20, 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold slaughtered 12 students and one teacher and wounded 24 others at Columbine High School in a Denver suburb. Virginia Tech's assassin mentioned Columbine in his manifesto. President Bush, mourner-in-chief and master of platitudes, attended a memorial service on Tuesday at Virginia Tech - but not before reaffirming his belief in the "right to bear arms." I can't be the only person who sees the perverseness in his rush to defend the assassin's right to buy the guns that killed 32 innocent people. Amid the personal mourning, Bush and other Second-Amendment supporters want us to chalk up last week's mass killings to the inevitable price of democracy. What an absurd distortion of truth! What point have we reached when we allow a president to minimize the preventable deaths of 32 people by blithely reducing the events to "[t]hey were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time"? Spare us your absurdist reductionism. No, Mr. President, they were exactly where they were supposed to be - in class. Surely someone else sees the hypocrisy in the manufactured shock that a 23-year-old with a history of mental illness is allowed to buy two guns and hundreds of rounds of ammunition that he uses to massacre 32 innocent people. Surely someone else sees the insanity in allowing someone - mentally ill or sane - to buy a 9mm Glock with the same ease and casualness with which a 10-year-old buys a Slurpee. It may be years before anyone is able to find meaning in the chaos of April 16. That meaning won't come from politicians or pundits. It will come from the next Eliot. Perhaps that will be you. Until then, all we can do is console ourselves, as Eliot wrote, with "the murmur of maternal lamentation." -- Original Source:SMU Daily Campus - April 24, 2007
"Norris, Mark William" <mnorris@mail.smu.edu>
Threat scrawled on desk chair found in Hyer Hall
By: Mark Norris, Editor In Chief, mnorris@smu.edu Posted: 4/25/07 A message scrawled on the back of a desk chair by an unknown person has prompted an investigation by SMU Police. The note says "I'm going to shoot up SMU on 8-06-07." The message was discovered Monday but was not reported to SMU Police until Tuesday morning. Authorities promptly responded, said Interim Police Chief Richard Shafer. "We have no leads and don't know who did it or why," Shafer said. The threat was discovered in Room 111 of Hyer Hall some time Monday. The professor of the class that meets there at that time reported the message to SMU Police. The message was written in pencil and still "looks fairly fresh," according to police. Shafer said the date of the threat is odd since classes are not in session at the time. The Summer II session is completed by then and the 2007-2008 school year has not begun yet. Police are looking at what classes meet in the room to determine if any names of interest appear on the class rosters. Shafer said the person who wrote the message probably has a warped sense of humor. "We don't think it's a viable or credible threat, but you never know," he said. The police investigation into the matter is still ongoing. This is the first threat made at the SMU community after the shootings at Virginia Tech. "Three weeks ago they probably wouldn't have thought about it," Shafer said. He said the police department is glad that the professor and students took the time to report the threat. He encouraged members of the SMU community to report anything they believe is suspicious. "Give us a call and someone will look into it," Shafer said. This story is exclusive to 'The Daily Campus.' Mention of this story by other media organizations must credit the paper. -- Original Source:SMU Daily Campus - April 25, 2007
By: Ben Briscoe, Contributing Writer, bbriscoe@smu.edu Posted: 4/25/07 First-year Weston Ashley went out to benches in front of his residence hall, Mary Hay, at 2 a.m. on the night of Oct. 12, 2006 to get his last nicotine fix before heading to bed, like he had done so many times before. But this night was different. As he sat alone in the cold air listening to The Killers on his iPod, a man Ashley had never seen before walked up to the four empty benches and sat down right beside him. "At first I didn't think anything of it," Ashley said. "He just asked me if he could buy a cigarette from me, and I said no and gave him one instead." The two then chatted for about 10 minutes about the lack of diversity at SMU before Ashley caught a glimpse out of the corner of his eye of something alarming. "I remember turning to him and sticking out of his big puffy jacket was a butcher knife," Ashley said. "I just pretty much froze. In my head I was like, 'Oh my God, I am gonna die.'" But Ashley's nerves calmed, and his instincts kicked in. He quickly told the man goodnight and then walked briskly, "hell almost running," to his room and called the police. About 20 minutes later police caught up with the man. He was holding another student by knifepoint outside of the Owen Fine Arts building. While the man was quickly taken to the Dallas County Jail, the memory still lingers in Ashley's mind. "Every once and a while I will think about it, and my heart will skip a couple of beats," he said. "You feel you're so safe because we live in this Highland Park bubble where everything is so nice and pretty and clean, but the truth is that we're not safer here than anywhere else. It's a hard thing to realize." That's exactly how Virginia Tech Wildlife Science major Danielle Kulas said she felt after the shootings last Monday. "I just remember thinking at first that April Fools Day had already gone by. I couldn't believe this was happening here," she said. "The part that really baffled me was when I found out the first shooting was in the dorm right next to mine." The reason Kulas said she had a hard time believing that the shootings were happening was because her dorms had seemed so safe until then. According to VT's police crime logs, fewer serious crimes (such as murder, sex offenses, robbery, assault, theft and arson) occurred in the Tech's residential facilities in 2005, the last year with data available, than SMU's residential facilities have had in the last three months. In the whole of 2005, there were seven forcible sex offenses, 11 burglaries and seven cases of arson for a total of 25 incidents at VT's dorms. Since Jan. 1, SMU's residential halls have been the site of five assaults, 20 thefts, one arson and three criminal trespasses for a total of 29. For Jeanie Goodson, mother of incoming first-year Caroline, it's those numbers and last Monday's event at Virginia Tech that are causing her to worry about her child living by herself in the fall. "I would not say I am petrified about sending my girl off to college, but after Virginia Tech, her safety next year has been on my mind a lot," Goodson said. "But you can't keep your child in a Zip-lock bag; the best thing I can do is to tell her to be careful and hope for the best." That's exactly the policy that Residence Life and Student Housing Director Doug Hallenbeck likes to stress. "It's a unique and difficult balance between safety and security and being more of a jail state," Hallenbeck said. "People don't want to live where RAs are going in daily to do room checks, so we have to balance that sense of home with a sense of security." To do that, the university utilizes two main methods: a card-swipe access restriction to residents only and a staff of residential advisers and professionals who keep an eye out for any abnormalities. For Ashley, these systems are good, but they aren't enough. "I think that really helps. But no matter how much we try to prevent crime, people are people and they will find a way," he said. "Just keep an eye out for anything strange. It's the best way to stay safe. I mean it saved my life and someday it might save yours." Since the Virginia Tech shooting, the university has taken new measures to improve the safety of the campus. On Friday, a campus-wide e-mail asked students to update their Emergency Contact information and add their cell phone numbers. In the event of an emergency, a voicemail will be left on cell phones, in addition to a bulk e-mail and Web site updates. General information about SMUs emergency procedures is available at http://www.smu.edu/newsinfo/preparedness/. -- Original Source:SMU Daily Campus - April 25, 2007
Korean feelings on Virginia Tech massacre
By: Hae Min Sung, Contributing Writer Posted: 4/24/07 There was a Virginia Tech Massacre. Everyone was horrified. The killer committed suicide in the end, but he had already killed 32 people. Whenever I turned on the television, I saw the killer's face, and I watched the video clips the killer sent to NBC. I am a Korean. And at some point, I wish that I could speak some Japanese or Chinese so that I wouldn 't have to admit it. That doesn't mean that I don't want to be a Korean or I hate my nationality. But for now, I really don't want to face. When I heard the killer was a Korean, I didn't want to believe it. Korea is a peaceful nation, and we don't do that kind of terrible thing, I thought. I didn't do it, but I am so ashamed as a Korean. He just ruined my country's name. There was a cherish ceremony in Los Angeles' Korea town right after the massacre was broadcasted. Some people say it's an overreaction that Korean people blame themselves, so much so that many Americans scoff at Koreans. Unlike America, Korea is a nation of collectivism. Nation, society and groups come first, then individuals. That is why people are ashamed themselves as parents, as students and as Koreans. It is not only the killer's problem, but also Koreans'. I don't know what to say to those victims' families and to Americans. I cannot say anything but "I'm sorry." Whenever people talk about the massacre, I really want to leave. Wherever I go, I feel like people see me in anger because I am Korean, even though I know that they really don't know whether I am or not. At some point, I am scared that people might hate me because I am a Korean. At another point, I am scared that people might hit me or say something because I am a Korean. I don't think that American people are that irrational to hit somebody only because they have the same nationality that killer has. But I am afraid because as a Korean, I am ashamed of myself. The killer said that the society made him like that and he didn't have any choice. He thought everyone hated him and treated him wrong, and he wouldn't run away from people and society anymore. I don't want to say something bad to a person who has the same nationality as I do. But the killer was a psycho, and his way to face "the enemy" was definitely wrong. Why are other people the enemy, and why does he think society is treating him wrong? What's he running from, and why does he have no choice but to kill people? What's wrong with this guy??!! I am so confused. I am so angry at him and feel so sorry for the victims, victims' family and everyone, but at the same time, I felt so bad for him as a Korean. If he were not a Korean, I think, I might not feel this confusion; instead I'd just blame the murderer and feel bad for people involved in the massacre. I wish that he were not a Korean. But he is; I cannot change that. I cannot change anything. I cannot do anything for the victims, their family and for people. I just can say I am so sorry. -- Original Source:SMU Daily Campus - April 24, 2007
The media are once again turning into the public's whipping boys By: The Daily Campus Ed Board Posted: 4/20/07 The nation is still focused on Blacksburg, Va. as all Americans honor the victims of the Virginia Tech shootings. But as the initial shock wears off, news organizations need to be weary of hyping a story that doesn't need the standard cable news sensationalism. This story has been sent across the globe since it occurred at the beginning of the week. People in Australia, London, India, South Korea and more are all discussing the matter. South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun offered condolences to victims for a third time and, among the South Korean public, a sense of despair prevailed. "I and our people cannot contain our feelings of huge shock and grief," said President Roh Moo-hyun. "I pray for the souls of those killed and offer words of comfort from my heart for those injured, the bereaved families and the U.S. people." Hundreds left messages on the country's top Web site, Naver. "I'm too shameful that I'm a South Korean," wrote an Internet user identified only by the ID iknijmik. "As a South Korean, I feel apologetic to the Virginia Tech victims." Ed Board understands that the Koreans are apologizing for Seung-Hiu because they do not want any race-related retaliation to occur. Asian-American groups have released similar statements for the same reason. But this is an angle of the story not worth the time devoted to it. There have been no retributions and there is no need for the Korean peninsula to apologize for a killer. Seung-Hiu wasn't acting on behalf of his country, he was only carrying out his personal desires. Not to mention the flap about NBC's airing of the controversial video made by the killer. As (amateur) members of the media, we appreciate that the network has to walk a careful line between letting people know the whole truth and not offending its viewership. We know that many don't want to pay the killer attention. But we also know that the families who want to see the man who killed their children have a right to do so. We know that after an event like this, people have a driving desire to understand why. Even though there's never going to be a definitive answer, the media have an obligation to report on as much of what happened as possible. -- Original Source:SMU Daily Press - April 20, 2007
4/16: A product of psychology or gun control?
By:Adam Rizzieri Posted: 4/20/07 It is no mystery that the tragedy of April 16 at Virginia Tech stands out as the deadliest student-perpetrated school shooting in the history of the United States. It goes without saying that an immediate sense of shock spread across the nation as we learned of the tragedy unfolding from networks like CNN and Fox News. Among the 32 innocent lives that perished on a day that will be forever engraved into the memory of our nation was a Holocaust survivor, a few well-established professors and several bright minds who had a beautiful future stolen from them. With this tragedy, the debates about gun control and explicit video games and music are likely to re-emerge, just as they did after the events at Columbine and other instances where schools have fallen victim to this societal plague. Are guns too easy to obtain, and do violent music and video games truly desensitize people to the point where it's easy to take a human life? These are questions that have emerged in the past; however, in this case I feel that they are not what need to be asked. The shooter at Virginia Tech, Cho Seung-Hiu, was a 23-year-old who had a history of violence and irrational behavior. Before his murderous rampage, it should be noted that he was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital, was the subject of two police reports in 2005 for stalking, and was known among the Virginia Tech faculty as "intimidating." In fact, the chairman of the English Department, Dr. Lucinda Roy, took his dark poetry to campus police after his professor, Nikki Giovanni, expressed her intentions to quit if he wasn't removed from her class. Cho wasn't your typical student, and though I'm not a psychiatrist, I think it's safe to say that he didn't kill his peers because of music from Marilyn Manson or "shoot 'em up" video games. This kid was a product of psychology and his interpretation of personal grievances. It is very likely, and almost obvious, that he suffered from some type of antisocial personality disorder. If any of you have seen the video he mailed to NBC in between his first and second round of attacks, his rambling of anger toward rich kids and hedonism serves as a tool for analysis on his psychological state. Phrases like "you decided to spill my blood" and "you forced me into a corner" show that Cho likely felt powerless and believed murder was the solution to his grievances. After a collegiate history of dark poetry and disturbing writings, he likely began to fixate on murder as a solution to regaining control of his problems. Despite the possibility that he felt powerless or whatever else his grievances might have been, this guy is not the victim he thought he was. Metaphorically speaking, Cho was a "cry baby" that threw the worst temper tantrum imaginable. The accessibility to guns and violence that exists in some video games is not what took the lives of the 32 innocent people. It's not guns that kill people; rather, it's people who kill people with guns (and knives, ropes and bats). Cho had no felony convictions, and thus was allowed to legally purchase a 9 mm Glock five weeks before these terrible killings. The reason I say gun control is not an issue in this case is simple. A person who is determined to shoot someone will find a way to obtain a weapon legally or illegally. The law doesn't stop law-breakers from breaking the law; it simply affects those who abide it. That is, a criminal will continue to break the law while a law-abiding citizen will adhere to the constraint of law. Therefore, any change in gun control is irrelevant to criminals both present and future. So when left with this situation, what questions should be asked? Was this the result of a failure in parenting? Perhaps people ignored an obviously disturbed individual who could have been treated by a psychiatric professional. There is no justification for the taking of innocent lives, but perhaps as a community of scholars we should ask ourselves, do we ignore the weird, quiet kid in class? -- Original Source:SMU Daily Campus - April 20, 2007
By: Emily Sears, Contributing Writer, esears@smu.edu Posted: 4/19/07 Pat McDonald is an atheist. The junior anthropology major was raised Catholic but reconsidered his religion his freshman year at SMU when he became familiar with Zen Buddhism and atheism. "It surprised me because I never had considered atheism before. Atheism is a scary idea to me, because it seemed so dark and dreary," he said. McDonald represents only a small percentage of Americans today. A recent Newsweek poll shows that 91 percent of Americans believe in God, and of the nine percent who don't, only three percent consider themselves atheists. SMU, unsurprisingly, has about 20 religious or spiritual organizations on campus ranging from Christian to Hindu to Pagan. The university, associated with the Methodist church, turns to prayer in the face of tragedy. Students, faculty and staff united at Hughes-Trigg Student Center recently to pray for the victims of the Virginia Tech mass killings. Crosses were placed in the main quad in memory of the massacred victims. Dr. Jill DeTemple, an SMU professor of religious studies, says the number of Americans who believe in God does not surprise her. In fact, she thinks the percentage would increase if the poll had asked about belief in a higher power rather than God, which would then include many Buddhists and Hindus. "Technically Buddhism is an atheistic religion," she said. DeTemple says it's becoming popular again to be religious. In the '50s it was expected, in the '70s it was unpopular, and now, she says, it's once again the norm. "I do think religion has a more public place than it did a few years ago," she said. DeTemple said openly religious political leaders became popular with Jimmy Carter. "Since then we've expected public leaders to be religious." Emily Worland, a Roman Catholic and SMU sophomore economics major, says her religion has an impact on her political views. "Through Catholicism I believe that everyone is equal, so I follow liberal principles," she said. A political candidate's religion matters to the voting public, according to the poll. It showed that 68 percent of Americans believe a person can be an atheist and a moral person, but only 29 percent would vote for a candidate who publicly claimed he or she was an atheist. "I think morality is more of a social norm than a religious following," Worland said. But President George W. Bush's religious beliefs - he is a devout Christian - can't save him from disapproval. According to the Newsweek poll, only 28 percent of Americans are satisfied with the direction of the country. Sixty-six percent are unsatisfied and six percent don't know. Christian Daw, an SMU English major, thinks many people believe in God because of the culture Americans live in. "I feel a lot of people equate God and love and goodness, and they think that if they believe in goodness and what is right, then they believe in God." He said his parents have this mentality, but their beliefs don't impact their daily lives. But Daw, a senior, is a practicing Christian, and his beliefs do influence his daily life. "I think in order to lead the most fulfilling life, God needs to be a part of your everyday decisions," he said. It seems many people turn to science to prove or disprove the existence of God. In "God: The Failed Hypothesis," author and physicist Victor J. Stenger used the existence of God as a hypothesis, putting the idea through a series of scientific studies. He eventually determined that God does not exist and the belief has actually made humankind worse off. "The certainty and exclusiveness of the major monotheisms make tolerances of differences very difficult to achieve, and these differences are the major source of conflict," he wrote. Lee Strobel, a graduate of Yale Law School and former legal affairs editor of the Chicago Tribune, also set out on an investigation to disprove God and the belief that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. His findings, chronicled in his book "The Case for Christ," changed him from an atheist to a pastor. He used eyewitness, documentary, scientific, psychological and even fingerprint evidence in his research. "The atheism I had embraced for so long buckled under the weight of historical truth," Strobel wrote. McDonald, the atheist, says he is waiting for proof of God, and he's open to the possibility of God's existence. He also understands why people are religious - it gives life meaning and in his view prevents social chaos. "This world can seem very boring, and it feels good to believe in God. It helps make every problem into a challenge, every ordeal into a test," he said. -- Original Source:SMU Daily Campus - April 19, 2007
Media Credit: Christina Parrish Members of the SMU community came together for a prayer service for those who were lost in Monday's Virginia Tech massacre. The service was to be held outside at the Flagpole but was moved inside due to inclement weather. -- Original Source:SMU Campus Daily - April 18, 2007
Senate acknowledges Virginia Tech shooting
By: Carey Elizabeth White, Contributing Writer, cwhite@smu.edu Posted: 4/18/07 Student Senate held a moment of silence for the victims and families of the Virginia Tech shooting and discussed campus safety yesterday in the second to last meeting of the semester. Senators discussed the need to increase awareness of safety procedures in addition to voicing their support of those affected by the Virginia Tech tragedy. One senator was concerned that no one knew the correct procedures for when the tornado sirens sounded last week. Senate agreed that more concrete legislation needs to be enacted to assure the safety of the students and our campus. Student Body President Taylor Russ said, "The first thing in our minds is survival," adding that, "We really do need an effective crisis management policy, because nothing in my mind outweighs the loss of a life." The current emergency preparedness plan can be found at smu.edu/newsinfo. The Senate hopes to help create a more effective policy for fall 2007. Later in the meeting, the League of United Latin American Citizens, otherwise known as LULAC, presented its case to be chartered as an organization on the SMU campus. The league advocates civil rights, supports leadership skills and provides scholarship funds to Hispanic educational communities. Several universities around the area charter this national organization. Universities like TCU, UT, UNT and TWU each have LULAC as a campus organization. Additionally, the executive committee ruled on the David Mingus Open Meetings Act. The act will create more transparency within Student Senate, making standing committees open at all times to all Senators and officers of the Student Senate, space permitting. The act was passed. The last Student Senate meeting of the year will be held next week on April 24. -- Original Source:SMU Daily Campus - April 18, 2007
SMU says it's ready for campus emergencies
By: Mark Norris, Editor In Chief, mnorris@smu.edu Posted: 4/17/07 SMU officials say they are prepared if an incident like the one at Virginia Tech happens here. As recently as December 2006 an active shooter scenario exercise was held according to Lee Arning, the director of emergency preparedness and business continuity. But the shootings at the Blacksburg, Va., campus have changed things. "Today's event has rewritten the rulebook," Arning said in an interview Monday evening. A gunman killed 32 people at Virginia Tech in the deadliest shooting rampage in United States history. The victims were massacred in two attacks two hours apart on opposite sides of the school's campus, with Tech's police force unable to warn anyone before the carnage ensued. It ended with the gunman committing suicide - making the final death toll 33. Arning said he would attend a meeting Tuesday morning with other administrators to discuss the incident and its ramifications for the SMU community. At SMU, in the event of such an incident, the building managers would be responsible for either locking down their buildings or taking other measures necessary to keep its occupants safe according to Arning. They could also pass along information through a network of people within each building. The next wave of communication would come electronically: via e-mail, the official university Web site and phone tree messages. Any messages could also be announced on an intercom system; however, there is not a central intercom system and not every building on campus has one to begin with. One thing that will not happen, Arning said, is police officers driving around the campus notifying people over speakers or bullhorns. He said that would make the police cars and officers targets. SMU has emergency "Lockdown/Take Cover" guidelines that Arning said he discusses during the annual campus fire drills at buildings. The guidelines say if a person perceives a threat of violence to dial 911 immediately or call SMU police at (214) 768-3333. It adds that evacuation alarms should not be sounded. It says to close, lock and barricade doors to reduce the potential risk of a violent person reaching the area where people are. The guidelines say the best way to secure oneself is by not moving around, crouching down and either getting out of sight or getting low on the floor. It says to remain silent because studies have shown that shooters will fire at things that move or make sounds. The guidelines also say to be prepared to remain in a lockdown state for an extended period of time. It will be safe to leave only when police on the scene gives an "all clear" message. "Your safety is dependent on compliance that may be uncomfortable for a little while," Arning said. Some Virginia Tech students told media outlets that the school failed to properly notify them of what was occurring and also accused the school of acting irresponsibly by not closing down the campus after the first shooting. Arning said if there were a similar incident at SMU, the school would err on the side of caution and shut down the campus. He said SMU PD, which would be the first responders to any incident on campus, has attended multi-day response training camps and would be ready for such events. Arning said it is likely SMU PD will go through more training after the events at Virginia Tech. "Their training is a strong part of their job," Arning said. The active shooter exercise held in December 2006 is another part of that training. Representatives of Highland Park PD, University Park PD, Dallas SWAT and SMU PD attended along with UP public affairs, SMU emergency management and public affairs. Arning said the scenario was based on research of previous incidents and allowed the different groups to have an idea of what it would be like to work together. At various points during the scenario, the group would stop and each agency would discuss what they would be doing at that point and how they could do their job better. "Everything is critically integrated," Arning said. After the scenario concluded the agencies discussed opportunities for improvement. Arning said the exercise was not the first one for the school, and credited SMU for continuing to refine its response to different events. He said meetings and discussions occurred twice already this semester in response to the incident at the Laura Lee Blanton Building with the suspicious envelope that wound up containing cooking powder and the meningitis infection that was on campus shortly before Spring Break. -- Original Source:SMU Daily Campus - April 18, 2007
The Virginia Tech massacre: Ed Board doesn't agree with the crisis policy or the media coverage
By: The Daily Campus Ed Board Posted: 4/17/07 The worst recorded shooting spree in American history occurred on the Virginia Tech campus in Blacksburg, Va., yesterday. Thirty-three people were murdered, dozens suffered injuries and the entire campus now must deal with grief. How does someone begin to digest the incomprehensible evil exhibited by this shooter and the needless loss of innocent lives? Our thoughts are with the families of the victims and the entire Virginia Tech community. This is the natural reaction people should have. We were shocked when we saw how politicians, such as John McCain, a Bush administration spokesperson and the media turned this event into a discussion about the right to bear arms. Political policy should not be a part of the discourse and coverage of the massacre at this early stage. It is entirely inappropriate to even mention political policy right now, when families are still being notified of their relatives' deaths. This is a time for mourning, not campaigning. If people need something to talk about, rather than just trying to cope, the discussion should be about why officials took two hours to close down the campus after the first shooting in the dorm. When a murder-suicide occurred at the University of Washington April 2, the entire campus was locked down. Rather than close down the entire campus immediately, Virginia Tech officials did not give students elsewhere on campus any information or warning for two hours. By this time, the gunman had closed off the exits to the engineering building and had begun his killing spree. Furthermore, students were first notified via e-mail about the incident. Ed Board does not think e-mail communication is sufficient for such a drastically dangerous event. Police should have been in every building within minutes of the dorm shooting, going into classrooms and locking down the campus. We wonder how officials here at SMU would react to such an event and hope that they would take better precautionary measures, leaving nothing to chance. In such cases, it's better to overreact than to sit by and do nothing. However, in SMU's emergency "Lockdown/Take Cover" guidelines, there is no indication of what officials, such as the SMU police, would do to protect students. The plan states that, in such an event, "emergency alarms should not be sounded" (dare they draw attention to the police instead of those in classrooms) and that information would be relayed via "e-mail, phone calls or word of mouth." Ed Board does not believe that this is an adequate means to alert the campus. A better solution would be to install a silent alarm system throughout campus, where flashing lights could indicate that something is wrong. Once again, we are shocked and saddened by this tragedy, and we encourage students to show their support by attending the prayer vigil at the Flagpole at 1:15 p.m. today. -- Original Source:SMU Daily Campus - April 17, 2007
By: Alex Sanders Posted: 4/25/07 Once the chaos at Virginia Tech subsided, students began to seek answers. Questions rapidly arose after authorities discovered Cho Seung-Hui was the cause of the tragedy. Of course, one of the first questions was, why did he do it? Immediately after the shooting, the university worked with the authorities, sifting through student interviews and Cho's medical history, to figure out what could have possibly influenced somebody to carry out the largest mass shooting in U.S. history. ABC News reported, "in December 2005 - more than a year before Monday's mass shootings - a district court in Montgomery County, Va., ruled that Cho presented "an imminent danger to self or others." That was the necessary criterion for a detention order, so that Cho ... could be evaluated by a state doctor and ordered to undergo outpatient care." However, while receiving outpatient care, the doctor specifically evaluated him as a threat to himself due to mental illness, and not a threat to others. Because of this, his records were kept confidential and by law, the university didn't have a right to know, and they certainly didn't have the right to pull him out of school. This case provides significant evidence that privacy laws concerning mental illness need to be changed. We will never really know if the Virginia Tech shootings could have been prevented, but if the privacy laws concerning mental illness are altered, it is highly unlikely that a shooting of this nature will occur again. Numerous signs pointed to Cho as a possible danger. He had complaints of stalking and sending threatening messages, thinking suicidal thoughts, and writing violent stories. Granted, the state cannot remove a student from school for being troubled or behaving oddly, but they should at least be allowed to alert the university. Instead of strict privacy laws, counseling centers and state institutions should be able to flag students with suspicious behavior or concerning mental illness symptoms. They do not have to breach confidentiality by explaining symptoms or problems, but they can subtly and vaguely alert the university so that it can keep an eye on the student. This way, the school is safe rather than sorry. In Cho's case, I think confidentiality should have been violated, and I also think it should be violated in the future if necessary. If a few people suspect odd behavior in a student, that may be a cause to alert the university and have them watch the student closely. But in Cho's case, numerous people noticed his odd behavior and almost tangible rage expressed through his macabre writing. Because so many people noticed Cho's behavior, the university should have been alerted of his full symptoms. Although it is a breach of confidentiality, it could have possibly saved 32 lives. Consider the fact Cho committed suicide after the massacre. Once deceased, confidentiality is no longer an issue. Hence, if a student is suspected suicidal or homicidal, confidentiality should most certainly be breached. Privacy should not matter when others' lives are at risk Cho fit the typical profile of someone who is homicidal. His personality was identical to other school shooters. According to CBS News, a study was done after the Columbine massacre showing a pattern in the personalities of the shooters. "Most school attacks come from loners with some kind of grievance," the report said. Many attackers felt bullied or persecuted by others, the study also said. More than half had revenge as a motive." Cho, like the shooters at Columbine, was seeking some sort of revenge. Cho did not make it clear against whom he was seeking revenge, but his writings told of an allegedly fictional pedophilic and homicidal stepfather. In his story, he devoted a paragraph to condemning his stepfather to death. The story reads, "Must kill Dick. Must kill Dick. Dick must die." Although writing is therapeutic, and it is healthy to express pent-up anger through writing, the rage the expressed was nearly palpable; he did not simply show vivid emotions. Additionally, many students do not express such violent thoughts in school assignments. Many write in a journal so they are able to express their thoughts while keeping their emotions private. The expression of Cho's violent thoughts should be seen as a cry for help or a warning rather than a simple worry about emotional problems. If privacy laws are changed, tragic massacres like the one that occurred at Virginia Tech can be prevented. I am not saying that confidentiality laws are pointless, but there are ways state mental institutions and counseling centers can compromise with the university or school. Counselors already warn students that they may have to take action if they suspect suicide or homicide. They should add schools and universities to the list of people alerted to the patient's condition. Even if counselors do not have proof of suicide or homicide, they should have the right to legally disclose suspicions to the university. Many people will not outwardly admit they are suicidal or homicidal, but they may give hints. Because of this, it is much safer for counselors to hedge their bets on suspicions rather than to risk students' lives. Unfortunately, school shootings are becoming ever more common. Because of this, we need an updated privacy policy that simultaneously ensures pubic safety while keeping some form of confidentiality in effect. -- Original Source:The Daily Campus - April 25, 2007
By: Daily Campus Editorial Board Posted: 4/24/07 The tragic shootings at Virginia Tech have provoked much discussion regarding measures to avoid future heartbreak. Perhaps the events in Blacksburg hit close to home in Storrs because of the similarities of the size and nature of the communities. Numerous measures have already been called for, some of which would entail strict regulation of the movement of people over campuses, including sign-in sheets and metal detectors. College campuses are open areas, and to restrict the movement of students over such a large area is both improbable and impractical. While the issue obviously needs to be addressed, any response must be reasonable, practical and not overbearing. Thankfully, events like this are rare. Due to this, it is impossible to detect when or where an individual may be driven to commit such an atrocity. It is equally impossible to plan for every eventuality. Regardless of the number of safeguards that may be enacted, it is impractical to expect to prevent something like this from happening again. Some hold counselors culpable for not taking appropriate action. It is extremely unfair to expect anyone to preempt this sort of tragedy by identifying and deterring those who may be likely to commit acts of violence. Even if violence were prevented, there would be no way to prove it was and anyone who took action would be open to liability imposed by our litigious culture. This threat of repercussion understandably causes most to pursue self-preservation rather than taking risks that may or may not save lives. Despite the inability to prevent, there may be more passive measures to keep people out of harm's way if such an incident does occur. Some deaths may have been prevented by a campus-wide notification system. Much of the campus was not aware that a shooting was ongoing. UConn currently has a call box system, the blue light emergency phones around campus, in place to allow distressed individuals to contact the UConn Police Department. This system could be programmed to put out audible and visual alerts there was a public danger. Another possibility is for universities to text message subscribers to an emergency alert program. Cell phone numbers could easily be taken during the beginning of semester registration. This way the message could be dispersed quickly and efficiently to the majority of those who carry phones. An attractive point of both measures is that they would remain inconspicuous until utilized. While safety is paramount, it is important to enable the living to continue living freely, and overt security measures would do nothing but remind students to live in fear. -- Original Source:The Daily Campus - April 24, 2007