NationStates Jolt Archive

"One of the first things you ask is the 'why' question. Why my child? And what if my son had been sick and hadn't gone to school? You ask the why question, which is...unanswerable."

That quote, given by Dale Lang, the father of a 17-year old child that was gunned down in a Canadian school shooting in Taber, Alberta not too long ago, sums up a lot of what I and many others, especially parents and family, are feeling and thinking in the wake of happened yesterday at Virginia Tech.

As soon as I learned what had gone on, I, and many along with me, questioned: "Why?" Why did the gunman kill those people? Why didn't he seek help if he was so angry? Why didn't he talk ith his parents if he was so angry? Why *was* he so angry? Why that school? Why those people? Why three-plus bullet viciousness? Why does this keep happening, despite the warnings that were given by Columbine and the Amish school at Nickel Mines? Why?

The fact is, Columbine and Nickel Mines did teach us something. They taught us all a lot of things. And yet, this horrific scene keeps springing up, more and more frequently as time wears on and thin. And what's frustrating, is that no one CAN say why. Maybe if the gunmen were kept alive, they'd say what it was that drove them to such brutality. But always they're gunned down; either by the police or, as in this case, their own hand. Their testimony lies silent in the grave - the only testimony that might have been able to answer the one now-unaswerable question family, friends, and even complete strangers to the victims are asking.

With that said, there are two people who are asking the same questions as everyone else; two people who will most likely go overlooked in the public mourning of this tragedy: the parents of 23-year-old Cho Seung-Hui, the gunman. Many would be quick to point the finger squarely on them, saying that if they had been more loving or more attentive or more nurturing or more available, then maybe Cho wouldn't have turned out the way he did. Maybe those people would still be alive. Maybe this could have been avoided. And maybe it could have; who can tell?

But that's not the point I want to make here. Before I go any further, I want to make it clear and plain here and now that my heartfelt prayers and sympathy go out to the families and friends of the victims of what happened at Virginia Tech yesterday. But we cannot and must not forget that Cho was in the death toll, and with his death, his two parents's names are entered - perhaps even at the top - in the list of families of the victims. It would be easy for us to say "Yesterday, 32 people were killed senselessly, ruthlessly and needlessly, and then the gunman killed himself." But here I want to plead with you not to make that mistake.

There are two innocent people who will now be subjected by many to a level of scrutiny and hatred that they should have never have had to face. They now will always be followed with the stigma of being bad role models and parents, regardless of whether or not it's shown to be true. They will be targeted by some as a scapegoat for their son's mistakes, they will be targeted by others as a release point for their anger and bitterness over what happened. The media will most likely target them as both.

We will probably never know what caused Cho to take so much life yesterday. He may have been the shooter, but that is certainly no reason to exclude his parents from the people deeply affected by this tragedy.

"One of the first things you ask is the 'why' question. Why my child? And what if my son had been sick and hadn't gone to school? You ask the why question, which is...unanswerable."

The parents of Cho Seung-Hui are asking those very questions right now. They mourn their child deeply, with good reason: their beloved son, whom they loved; the child they held as so precious, so dear; he was one of the 33 killed by a ruthless murderer at Virginia Tech.

He was the very first one to die.

-snip-
Hear hear. I'm sure you understand that, with the dehumanisation of terrorists and criminals made widespread by our governments and our media, people will not naturally think like this, but I hope people (and even myself) can listen to this.

I'm just wondering when they'll get to blaming video games and D&D, like they usually do.

I'm just wondering when they'll get to blaming video games and D&D, like they usually do.

Don't forget the demonic music. Damn you Ozzy Osbourne (http://www.lyricsfreak.com/o/ozzy+osbourne/crazy+train_20103982.html)!

Thank you for this. Following the Columbine shootings, a local church erected 15 crosses, to represent those who had died. Some of the families objected, and several went so far as to tear down two of the crosses, which presumably represented Harris and Klebold. A most telling remark, by one of the fathers, was that, although he knew it was an irrational act, how good it felt to tear down the two crosses. No one pointed out to him that he may have been feeling just what Eric and Dylan felt, as they pulled their triggers.

Don't forget the gun nuts who'll claim that even if guns were banned he'd bring in a knife and still be able to kill 31 people.

I'm just wondering when they'll get to blaming video games and D&D, like they usually do.

Don't forget horror movies and unrestricted cable TV.

As someone who made his living for many years promoting and selling role-playing games, I'm as against the arbitrary blame game as anyone. However, I can't help noticing the trend towards extreme violence and gore as not simply acceptable, but desirable traits. Look at Grindhouse, or the Vice City games, or the highly popular teen horror movies.

Compare those to the horror levels in 50's and 60's horror flicks and the escalation is obvious. Alfred Hitchcock could terrify you with red dye circling a drain. Tarentino wants you to see bullets exiting your head in slow motion. Tell me that's not a desensitizing agent.

I'm not going to point at this young Asian and state "here is your problem, officer", but it's obvious to me that they've all played a factor. Ask a kid in the 50's how often the Indian won in the neighborhood games of 'cowboys and Indians'. Ask a Native American how much respect that sort of game (and the associated cowboy movies) engendered towards his people.

No, you can't discard that whole topic with a flippant forum post. It's there, and it's a part of the problem.

Don't forget the gun nuts who'll claim that even if guns were banned he'd bring in a knife and still be able to kill 31 people.

First, calling me a gun nut is more than facetious, as I don't even own a gun, nor have I ever owned a gun. I don't get my jollies from running around in camo, shooting cardboard cutouts of human beings.

Second, the basis of the argument is that if guns were banned, he'd be able to get ahold of a gun regardless.

Thank you very much PR and Fris both for your very accurate and thoughtful posts.

The why is forever lost - we can only hold to the facts as cold, dry and unsatisfactory as they may be.

We must remember all of those who died, even the killer who rests as one of them.
Can we stop it from happening again - I seriously doubt it - I think we've past some invisible, unknown line in the sand and humanity ( and individuals ) is far better known for giving into it's baser impulses than it's better ones. And I am very willing to say that a good many things in our culture have made it much more acceptable. But D&D, videos and such can't take all the blame- we've let them alter us - We've let ourselves come to think that it's okay to lose control, to not be responsible for our actions and words. Not to have patience, tolerance, forgiveness, simple courtesy etc...


We have become a culture of instant gratification- angry at a girlfriend who doesn't love you the way you think you love her? Kill her rather than try and work it out, or move on with you life and let the relationship go. Want to be instantly cool and with it? Go join a gang and shoot at some strangers standing in a park...


Guns don't kill people, neither do knives, IED's and vehicles - it's the rampaging humans that hold them, set them, drive them that do so.

My sympathies are with his family though, they have suffered just as much as any of the other families involved, and should not be ostracized for the actions of their son.

Don't forget horror movies and unrestricted cable TV.

As someone who made his living for many years promoting and selling role-playing gamesOooh, what company did you work for?,

I'm as against the arbitrary blame game as anyone. However, I can't help noticing the trend towards extreme violence and gore as not simply acceptable, but desirable traits. Look at Grindhouse, or the Vice City games, or the highly popular teen horror movies.

Compare those to the horror levels in 50's and 60's horror flicks and the escalation is obvious. Alfred Hitchcock could terrify you with red dye circling a drain. Tarentino wants you to see bullets exiting your head in slow motion. Tell me that's not a desensitizing agent.

I'm not going to point at this young Asian and state "here is your problem, officer", but it's obvious to me that they've all played a factor.
Perhaps, but they arn't the brainwashing agent that parents and the media make them out to be. I remember seeing some woman on the news saying kids shouldn't play FFVII because the point of the game was to "destroy your enemies".
Ask a kid in the 50's how often the Indian won in the neighborhood games of 'cowboys and Indians'. Ask a Native American how much respect that sort of game (and the associated cowboy movies) engendered towards his people.


I really don't see how this connects to your point.

No, you can't discard that whole topic with a flippant forum post. It's there, and it's a part of the problem.
Of course society exposes people to more of it these days. It has always been my understanding, however, that such items are here because people enjoy and want them (and because we have fostered a system of economics that gives people what they want, no questions asked). Violence and illegality is prevalent in culture as a symptom of a serious disillusionment with the world on the part of the people that watch and create it.

Let's not beat around the bush here; there is something seriously wrong with our society if we drive people to want to watch or partake in murder. Now, I'm not denying that a culture of the glorification of violence will in part preserve itself anyway, but even if we just fight it back, its original success will be repeated to haunt us and our successors in the future. We are not going to properly solve this problem if all we do is to try (with inevitable futility) to prevent people from seeing it or doing it - we need to get right down to the root causes of the communal illnesses that let such items flourish.

We should not rush to assign blame, but we should try to understand. It won't be easy, since the gunman is dead, but it needs to be done.

Why? Why does it happen rather often in the US, and not so often in other countries? It does happen, but with more frequency in the US.

Why? Why did this south korean boy do this? Why did he come back to kill all those people such a long time after the killing of the first two people?

There are so many questions we'll never find the answers to...

I really don't see how this connects to your point.

He is pointing out the desensitizing nature of games. "Cowboys and Indians"(And pretty much all movies with native Americans in them, especially from that time) was quite disrespectful and demeaning to Native Americans, even though the game was socially accepted.

"One of the first things you ask is the 'why' question. Why my child?

by Dale Lang..why? the aswer is very simple.

In most Canadian and US high Schools.. teens are over protected by the system.

They can commit assault.. (brake the nose of a teacher/principal) and they usually get away with little punishment.

but If its that teacher/principal who by defending himself.. breaks the nose of the student.. his life is doomed.. he will lose his job and his pic will be on the newspapers..

As a result we have a culture of Taxing and bulling..

A most telling remark, by one of the fathers, was that, although he knew it was an irrational act, how good it felt to tear down the two crosses. No one pointed out to him that he may have been feeling just what Eric and Dylan felt, as they pulled their triggers.

That is probably the dumbest thing I've ever read and I occasionally read through the Ebaumsworld forums.

Eric and Dylan were acting perfectly rational. They had planned the attack on Columbine for months on end, and even in this case, the Virginia Tech shooting, the shooter came well prepared. It's not as if someone made fun of him and he just happened to be carrying an assload of firepower on him at the time. No, he locked over forty people in a room and began shooting.

Yes I will hold the parents under a lot of scrutiny. The columbine kids were making pipe bombs and torturing animals well under their parent's notice. The same would probably go with this lunatic. Crazy isn't something that just happens, it's a long enduring struggle with ones own psyche and by god if you don't notice your kid going through that then you should be held accountable as parents.

I would love to know what their response is to this.

He is pointing out the desensitizing nature of games. "Cowboys and Indians"(And pretty much all movies with native Americans in them, especially from that time) was quite disrespectful and demeaning to Native Americans, even though the game was socially accepted.

Yes, the games were demeaning to Native Americans, but were the kids that played them in the fifty's any more likely to go around shooting Native Americans?

the sad part is, the hounding of the shooter's parents and family will be done by the media with their "right to know" mentallity. I hope this will not be the case.

at 23 years old, Cho is in control of his life. his choices and his mistakes are squarely on him. I for one do not blame anyone but the shooter. I can only hope the media does the same.

Thank you for this. Following the Columbine shootings, a local church erected 15 crosses, to represent those who had died. Some of the families objected, and several went so far as to tear down two of the crosses, which presumably represented Harris and Klebold. A most telling remark, by one of the fathers, was that, although he knew it was an irrational act, how good it felt to tear down the two crosses. No one pointed out to him that he may have been feeling just what Eric and Dylan felt, as they pulled their triggers.

Far to often people blame the "boogeymen" for these types of things: Music, games, movies, media, etc., as if there is nothing else to blame. They ignore their role, and their affects upon the situation.

For Columbine, was it the music? Could music have such a vast affect on the human psyche to make people to act?

Or perhaps the video games? Of course! Video games are to blame.

Movies as well!

Oh, let us forget how they were treated their entire life. Let us forget that they were social outcasts. Let us forget that they were constantly ridiculed, every day of of their lives, in a never ending barrage of insults and humiliation. Let us forget that they were driven out of society, and driven mad by it. Let us forget our role in the creation of monsters and demons in the world, instead blaming the boogeymen in the closet.

Many of you may be offended by this. As though I am saying you are to blame. Instead, I am saying we all have a hand in the creation of demons. We all are responsible for the outcome of our actions.

And yet, when those actions create monsters of men, we are blind to our own hand.

Tis a sad world, indeed.

Oh, let us forget how they were treated their entire life. Let us forget that they were social outcasts. Let us forget that they were constantly ridiculed, every day of of their lives, in a never ending barrage of insults and humiliation. Let us forget that they were driven out of society, and driven mad by it. Let us forget our role in the creation of monsters and demons in the world, instead blaming the boogeymen in the closet.

Oh christ that's a fucking myth.

Senior year a kid was just shy from unloading 24 shotgun rounds through the pep rally. He was arrested after pumping rounds into his neighbor's house (there was a patrol car nearby thankfully), and later hung himself in holding. They found a 12 gauge and 24 rounds in his locker the day of the pep rally. No one ever made fun of this guy, hell I smiled politely to him everytime I walked by. Don't even try to justify these spineless assclowns for a second.

Far to often people blame the "boogeymen" for these types of things: Music, games, movies, media, etc., as if there is nothing else to blame. They ignore their role, and their affects upon the situation.

For Columbine, was it the music? Could music have such a vast affect on the human psyche to make people to act?

Or perhaps the video games? Of course! Video games are to blame.

Movies as well!

Oh, let us forget how they were treated their entire life. Let us forget that they were social outcasts. Let us forget that they were constantly ridiculed, every day of of their lives, in a never ending barrage of insults and humiliation. Let us forget that they were driven out of society, and driven mad by it. Let us forget our role in the creation of monsters and demons in the world, instead blaming the boogeymen in the closet.

Many of you may be offended by this. As though I am saying you are to blame. Instead, I am saying we all have a hand in the creation of demons. We all are responsible for the outcome of our actions.

And yet, when those actions create monsters of men, we are blind to our own hand.

Tis a sad world, indeed.

What about the whole thing about them being white supremacists? That seems to get forgotten, somehow.

Oh christ that's a fucking myth.

Senior year a kid was just shy from unloading 24 shotgun rounds through the pep rally. He was arrested after pumping rounds into his neighbor's house (there was a patrol car nearby thankfully), and later hung himself in holding. They found a 12 gauge and 24 rounds in his locker the day of the pep rally. No one ever made fun of this guy, hell I smiled politely to him everytime I walked by. Don't even try to justify these spineless assclowns for a second.
These are probably just rumours, I'm not sure, but didn't this incident involve something about a girlfriend dumping the killer? What a bloody petty thing to kill dozens of people over. Anyway, I'd presume that if he managed to get a girlfriend he wasn't really ostracized. I haven't seen a news article about this, so I'm not sure if it was true.

These are probably just rumours, I'm not sure, but didn't this incident involve something about a girlfriend dumping the killer? What a bloody petty thing to kill dozens of people over. Anyway, I'd presume that if he managed to get a girlfriend he wasn't really ostracized. I haven't seen a news article about this, so I'm not sure if it was true.

He did have a pretty good looking girlfriend freshman through sophmore year that I know of. After that I think she moved or something because I never saw her around again.

The press of atlantic city had an article about it, but for the most part I was surprised it was so low key.

Oh christ that's a fucking myth.

Senior year a kid was just shy from unloading 24 shotgun rounds through the pep rally. He was arrested after pumping rounds into his neighbor's house (there was a patrol car nearby thankfully), and later hung himself in holding. They found a 12 gauge and 24 rounds in his locker the day of the pep rally. No one ever made fun of this guy, hell I smiled politely to him everytime I walked by. Don't even try to justify these spineless assclowns for a second.

ridiculed is not the only thing that others do to social outcasts. Ignored is also another favored treatment of them. you smiled, but how often did you talk to him? and did others? I don't mean "hi" but really talk to him, find out his hobbies, and his strengths.

maybe he felt he was too different to fit in? maybe he felt he was being wronged for something he had no control over? maybe he felt the whole school was laughing at him even tho they wern't.

how many friends did he have? Speaking from experience, being alone in a crowd is not a fun feeling.

no. Ridicule is not the only treatment social outcasts get.

and this is not a justification, but an attempt to understand the possible 'why'

There is far too much emphasis place upon the importance of school in the US. It screws people up.

Yes, the games were demeaning to Native Americans, but were the kids that played them in the fifty's any more likely to go around shooting Native Americans?

Don't look for a literal connection in every line. Native Americans were often regarded as second-class (or worse) citizens, and they suffered socially, economically, and politically in real and measurable ways. In the last decade or two, we've desensitized violence in the same way, and the victims may be seen by the shooters as nothing more than animated pop-ups in a game, or actors who can walk away after the director yells 'Cut!'.

This is becoming a society where 'suicide by cop' has becoming increasingly common, and in some ways even admirable. Luporum referred to the Columbine killers as "Eric and Dylan", and I'll bet 95% of the readers here caught the reference before reading the next sentence. Why? Because they achieved in death exactly what they sought - notoriety. And here we are, perpetuating their desires by turning them into cultural icons.

We did it with Charlie Manson, with Mark David Chapman, with John Wilkes Booth, and plenty of others, so it's not a new phenomenon. That doesn't make it right, though. As a society we should be condemning this murderers, not adding them to the 'most notorious' pages of Wikipedia and celebrating their 'accomplishments'.

It's not a new problem, but there's no question the body count has escalated. I think violent games are a part of the problem, as well as parents using the TV and DVD player as a babysitter. Add to that the responses today on this and other forums, where punk kids with no sense of moral outrage are posting dumb jokes about it already.

People see murder as entertainment now. Where is the outrage about that?

I've just seen on CNN on the ticker that the gunman was described by students as a "loner"...it's always a "loner"...

What I'm concerned about are people becoming suspicious of a person who tends to eat alone at school and spends more time in the library than out at parties. They become suspicious, then they start avoiding him, and the vicious cycle continues.

Somehow, however, I doubt the whole "loner who decides to kill" thing.

ridiculed is not the only thing that others do to social outcasts. Ignored is also another favored treatment of them. you smiled, but how often did you talk to him? and did others? I don't mean "hi" but really talk to him, find out his hobbies, and his strengths.

maybe he felt he was too different to fit in? maybe he felt he was being wronged for something he had no control over? maybe he felt the whole school was laughing at him even tho they wern't.

how many friends did he have? Speaking from experience, being alone in a crowd is not a fun feeling.

no. Ridicule is not the only treatment social outcasts get.

and this is not a justification, but an attempt to understand the possible 'why'


Seeing as how he's dead I'll use his name. Yuri had plenty of friends and a girlfriend, which was more than I could say for myself.

Maybe he was crazy. Something I'm not too far from myself. I understand why he would think such a thing, but to actually act upon it. I'm sorry if I'm not going to go out of my way to talk to every strange face I see during the day, but I've always figured a polite smile and a nod was enough.

I'm just wondering when they'll get to blaming video games and D&D, like they usually do.

Jack Thompson already has. He blamed it on violent video games even before the identity of the gunman was known and before it was determined that the shootings were done by the same guy.

I only knew their names were Eric and Dylan because they were mentioned in the posts above me.

Don't look for a literal connection in every line. Native Americans were often regarded as second-class (or worse) citizens, and they suffered socially, economically, and politically in real and measurable ways. In the last decade or two, we've desensitized violence in the same way, and the victims may be seen by the shooters as nothing more than animated pop-ups in a game, or actors who can walk away after the director yells 'Cut!'.
Someone has to be pretty unbalanced to begin with for the line between reality and fiction to blur like that. At that point, anything could feed into a person's delusion. I've played a lot of GTA, but I don't feel that it would make it any easier to kill an actual human.

This is becoming a society where 'suicide by cop' has becoming increasingly common, and in some ways even admirable. Luporum referred to the Columbine killers as "Eric and Dylan", and I'll bet 95% of the readers here caught the reference before reading the next sentence. Why? Because they achieved in death exactly what they sought - notoriety. And here we are, perpetuating their desires by turning them into cultural icons.

We did it with Charlie Manson, with Mark David Chapman, with John Wilkes Booth, and plenty of others, so it's not a new phenomenon. That doesn't make it right, though. As a society we should be condemning this murderers, not adding them to the 'most notorious' pages of Wikipedia and celebrating their 'accomplishments'.
You do have a point here, and I was reading a book about fear and violence that mentioned these points.

It's not a new problem, but there's no question the body count has escalated. I think violent games are a part of the problem, as well as parents using the TV and DVD player as a babysitter. Add to that the responses today on this and other forums, where punk kids with no sense of moral outrage are posting dumb jokes about it already.

People see murder as entertainment now. Where is the outrage about that?
People have always been like that. Ever since the romans. It's not some new fangled contraption. also, crime by youths has gone down steadily since the invention of video games. I don't think your argument has a leg to stand on.

Add to that the responses today on this and other forums, where punk kids with no sense of moral outrage are posting dumb jokes about it already.

Maybe people are sick and tired of this cropping up every few years. The same 'moral outrage' happens..... with nothing done to prevent it the next time.

Maybe people don't feel this deserves the same amount of air time as other 'moral outrages' in the world right now.

To me, this doesn't mean anything. Someone went nuts in the States and killed a whole load of people. Yeah? And? Might sound cold, but I feel slightly irked that these innocents seem to be more deserving of the attention than innocents dying in Iraq or Darfur or the Congo. 30 odd people were killed in the US. How many were killed in any of the above places that same day?

You may say I'm being heartless, but Virginia Tec impacts on me as much as any of the aforementioned places. I'm just honest about it.

This shooting was horrible. Comparing it to Iraq, or Darfour, or the massacre at Wounded Knee (on another forum I frequent) is so fucking stupid as to be nearly beyond belief. It's not 'worse' than those things, no right minded person would even suggest it. It's not the same at all...so no, when it's being discussed, there is no need to insert some sort of caveat like, 'okay, it's not as bad as the Holocaust but...' etc.

So you know what...let people discuss the tragedy and deal with it, without accusing them of not caring about other horrors.

This shooting was horrible.
I agree. When did I say it wasn't?

Comparing it to Iraq, or Darfour, ... is so fucking stupid as to be nearly beyond belief.
Comparing airtime for innocent people being killed with like is "fucking stupid"? How?

It's not 'worse' than those things, no right minded person would even suggest it.
I didn't say it was worse.

It's not the same at all...so no,Ok. Why? That's twice you've said so, but you've yet to say why.

when it's being discussed, there is no need to insert some sort of caveat like, 'okay, it's not as bad as the Holocaust but...' etc.
I didn't say or imply that whatsoever. You've missed the point of the post.

So you know what...let people discuss the tragedy and deal with it, without accusing them of not caring about other horrors.
......and I've said that.... where exactly?

Seeing as how he's dead I'll use his name. Yuri had plenty of friends and a girlfriend, which was more than I could say for myself.

Maybe he was crazy. Something I'm not too far from myself. I understand why he would think such a thing, but to actually act upon it. I'm sorry if I'm not going to go out of my way to talk to every strange face I see during the day, but I've always figured a polite smile and a nod was enough.

then Yuri wasn't a social outcast in my opinion.

and while I did ask if you talked to him, while sometimes a friendly smile can do worlds of wonder, talking can also do lots more. please don't take it as a critique on your actions. after all, as you and others indicated, you really don't know until it happens.

I agree. When did I say it wasn't? When did I say you did?


Comparing airtime for innocent people being killed with like is "fucking stupid"? How? Comparing a situation of a random gunman going beserk to war is fucking stupid. Just like comparing a random gunman going beserk to Wounded Knee is stupid. They aren't the same situation, your reduction to 'innocent people being killed' notwithstanding.


I didn't say it was worse. I wasn't talking about you...which should have been obvious. I am countering your insinuation that the people discussing this somehow believe it to be worse than the examples you brought up.

Ok. Why? That's twice you've said so, but you've yet to say why. Then think a little while longer. You can't reduce this to 'innocents killed' and then crow, 'look, Ma, it's the same!'.


I didn't say or imply that whatsoever. You've missed the point of the post.


......and I've said that.... where exactly?Get over yourself. If my post was intended for you alone, I'd have quoted you.

Nonetheless, you have been implying that the massive media attention on this incident is outrageous while Iraq and Darfour go on largely unreported. You are 'irked' by the attention they are getting. That's nice. Get over it.

I don't give a shit if you in particular don't care about this. Other people do. So...bye.

So we're back to the violent media (i.e. movies and games) and guns debate. Take a look at this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runs_amok) on Running Amok. This was a widespread problem in Malaysia during the turn of the century. The people who ran amok usually used knives and swords and this was well before television and movies. No one knows for sure why they did it.

Guns were carried through out the western US during the 19th century yet people didn't go "postal" and start shooting people right and left. Sure people were murdered by guns, but these were usually a result of arguments and other crimes of passion or just plain greed.

Many serial killer do not use guns and Jack the Ripper certainly didn't play Vice City on his Playstation III.

Now I admit that guns have made it easier for people to kill. Running around slicing people with a sword would be very hard work, most people could just out run the attacker and the reload time on a bow would also slow down the death rate. That being said, guns are still not to blame.

Guns and violent media make very convenient targets, but they don't address the whole issue. And while I don't pretend to know the answers, I have a supicion that these type of people have always been with us and always will be.

Comparing a situation of a random gunman going beserk to war is fucking stupid. Just like comparing a random gunman going beserk to Wounded Knee is stupid. They aren't the same situation, your reduction to 'innocent people being killed' notwithstanding.
I don't understand. People dying in tragic circumstances is not equatable with... people dying in tragic circumstances? Im not talking about 'war' per se. I'm talking about incidents. A shooting. A bomb. A building collapsing.

I wasn't talking about you...which should have been obvious. I am countering your insinuation that the people discussing this somehow believe it to be worse than the examples you brought up. Then think a little while longer. You can't reduce this to 'innocents killed' and then crow, 'look, Ma, it's the same!'.
It wasn't obvious as you responded to my post (re words like Darfur and Iraq directly after my own). You can counter all day - I didn't insinuate anything. And why would I 'crow' about anything? I'm not happy these people died.

Yes, I think I can reduce this to 'innocents killed' and I see no reason why it can't be discussed like that. Thats obtuse reasoning.

Get over yourself. If my post was intended for you alone, I'd have quoted you.
*gets over self*
You respond to my post (as I previously said), I'll assume you intend it for me. :rolleyes:

Nonetheless, you have been implying that the massive media attention on this incident is outrageous while Iraq and Darfour go on largely unreported.
Implying? No. Stating bluntly? Yeah. (and outrageous in the 'saturation' amount, not the "OMG not this again!" way)

Get over it.
Great response. Really took the matter to task. *gets over it*

I don't give a shit if you in particular don't care about this. Other people do. So...bye.
Oh no. How will I sleep tonight?

Don't look for a literal connection in every line. Native Americans were often regarded as second-class (or worse) citizens, and they suffered socially, economically, and politically in real and measurable ways. In the last decade or two, we've desensitized violence in the same way, and the victims may be seen by the shooters as nothing more than animated pop-ups in a game, or actors who can walk away after the director yells 'Cut!'.

This is becoming a society where 'suicide by cop' has becoming increasingly common, and in some ways even admirable. Luporum referred to the Columbine killers as "Eric and Dylan", and I'll bet 95% of the readers here caught the reference before reading the next sentence. Why? Because they achieved in death exactly what they sought - notoriety. And here we are, perpetuating their desires by turning them into cultural icons.

We did it with Charlie Manson, with Mark David Chapman, with John Wilkes Booth, and plenty of others, so it's not a new phenomenon. That doesn't make it right, though. As a society we should be condemning this murderers, not adding them to the 'most notorious' pages of Wikipedia and celebrating their 'accomplishments'.

It's not a new problem, but there's no question the body count has escalated. I think violent games are a part of the problem, as well as parents using the TV and DVD player as a babysitter. Add to that the responses today on this and other forums, where punk kids with no sense of moral outrage are posting dumb jokes about it already.

People see murder as entertainment now. Where is the outrage about that?
I think you make many good points, things I (in other threads) broadly call "Culture" when I say that the US culture and attitude towards guns and violence is a huge part of the problem.

By the way, here's a report made in 2000, analyzing 37 school shootings from the 70's up 'til 2000.

Conclusions:
There is no profile of a typical child who kills. The shooters come from many types of families, from all incomes, from all races, from all academic backgrounds. No easy explanations—mental illness, drugs, video games—explain their actions. No profile rules anyone in or out.
• The shooters did not snap. These attacks were neither spontaneous nor impulsive. The shooters usually had chosen targets in advance: students, principals and teachers. This may give adults time to prevent an attack.
• Many of these children saw the killing as a way to solve a problem, such as to stop bullying by other children.
• The shooters told their friends of their grievances, and often told someone of the violence they planned. Those who knew in advance sometimes egged on the shooters, and rarely told any adult.
• The students had no trouble acquiring weapons, usually bringing them in from home.
http://powerreporting.com/files/shoot.pdf

You can't reduce this to 'innocents killed' and then crow, 'look, Ma, it's the same!'..

I think that's a perfectly reasonable position.

People who are much the same, in terms of being "normal, everyday people" have been known to commit entire genocides. We're talking this type of shooting *10, or maybe 100 or a 1000.

People who after the fact did not always die.

This would actually put the shootings in the US to be exceptional, because in similar situations, groups of people have a nasty habit of banding together and performing the whole genocide act. It's a good thing that the US isn't a place where people do that.

It's still horrible this happened, why aren't similar situations (normal guy(s) (or gals as the case may be) goes crazy and kills shitloads of people) as widely discussed? I think in this case, it's clearly because one does not affect the western world, the other one does. One we cannot imagine, but the other is our worst nightmare.

But that nightmare could be so much worse. What does that say about the human race?

Yeah, I'm rambling but to sum it up:

This was horrible.

Similar horrible things are happening elsewhere too, sometimes on far larger scales.

What part of humanity is it that fuels this?

-snip-
Comparison is pointless, I agree, but I also think it's important to use the memory of horrific events like this to force ourselves to strive to prevent them from ever occurring again. And naturally, this will require us to think about places where they are happening on a daily basis.

I feel I must repeat the assertion from the 1970-2000 student shooting spree study that there is NO ONE KIND OF PERSON and NO ONE REASON for these catastrophes.

When you just "snap", there's usually little, if any planning involved. When folks just "snap", they tend to commit voilent crimes of opportunity, and those don't usually involve a gun unless they're near one when they "snap".

Columbine, Paducah, Jonesboro, Moses Lake, and now Blacksburg were each, to a man, premeditated and planned assaults. That kind of thing doesn't spontaneously erupt out of a damaged psyche, but takes years of vengeful and violent thoughts piling up on one another, steeping in a mind wounded by any number of cumulative traumas. If every avenue appears closed, and it appears that nobody cares -- whether or not such is actually the case -- these thoughts can beome an inexorable force, driving someone to what seem to be, on the outside, irrational acts. However, these acts are perfectly rationalized by the mind so fermented in negative emotions.

That doesn't excuse the actions of those who murder on this kind of scale, but it should make people aware that, while they may not be their peers' keeper, at the very least, they should remind themselves that we need to act decently toward one another, even when we don't really feel like it. Yeah, some people are hard to take as personalities, but as long as everyone is honest and considerate, nobody needs to be allowed to stew in hateful juices.

then Yuri wasn't a social outcast in my opinion.

and while I did ask if you talked to him, while sometimes a friendly smile can do worlds of wonder, talking can also do lots more. please don't take it as a critique on your actions. after all, as you and others indicated, you really don't know until it happens.

I think if I sat down and had a heart to heart conversation with him he'd be more inclined to go berserk. Everyone always does. *scratches head*

"One of the first things you ask is the 'why' question. Why my child? And what if my son had been sick and hadn't gone to school? You ask the why question, which is...unanswerable."

That quote, given by Dale Lang, the father of a 17-year old child that was gunned down in a Canadian school shooting in Taber, Alberta not too long ago, sums up a lot of what I and many others, especially parents and family, are feeling and thinking in the wake of happened yesterday at Virginia Tech.

As soon as I learned what had gone on, I, and many along with me, questioned: "Why?" Why did the gunman kill those people? Why didn't he seek help if he was so angry? Why didn't he talk ith his parents if he was so angry? Why *was* he so angry? Why that school? Why those people? Why three-plus bullet viciousness? Why does this keep happening, despite the warnings that were given by Columbine and the Amish school at Nickel Mines? Why?

The fact is, Columbine and Nickel Mines did teach us something. They taught us all a lot of things. And yet, this horrific scene keeps springing up, more and more frequently as time wears on and thin. And what's frustrating, is that no one CAN say why. Maybe if the gunmen were kept alive, they'd say what it was that drove them to such brutality. But always they're gunned down; either by the police or, as in this case, their own hand. Their testimony lies silent in the grave - the only testimony that might have been able to answer the one now-unaswerable question family, friends, and even complete strangers to the victims are asking.

With that said, there are two people who are asking the same questions as everyone else; two people who will most likely go overlooked in the public mourning of this tragedy: the parents of 23-year-old Cho Seung-Hui, the gunman. Many would be quick to point the finger squarely on them, saying that if they had been more loving or more attentive or more nurturing or more available, then maybe Cho wouldn't have turned out the way he did. Maybe those people would still be alive. Maybe this could have been avoided. And maybe it could have; who can tell?

But that's not the point I want to make here. Before I go any further, I want to make it clear and plain here and now that my heartfelt prayers and sympathy go out to the families and friends of the victims of what happened at Virginia Tech yesterday. But we cannot and must not forget that Cho was in the death toll, and with his death, his two parents's names are entered - perhaps even at the top - in the list of families of the victims. It would be easy for us to say "Yesterday, 32 people were killed senselessly, ruthlessly and needlessly, and then the gunman killed himself." But here I want to plead with you not to make that mistake.

There are two innocent people who will now be subjected by many to a level of scrutiny and hatred that they should have never have had to face. They now will always be followed with the stigma of being bad role models and parents, regardless of whether or not it's shown to be true. They will be targeted by some as a scapegoat for their son's mistakes, they will be targeted by others as a release point for their anger and bitterness over what happened. The media will most likely target them as both.

We will probably never know what caused Cho to take so much life yesterday. He may have been the shooter, but that is certainly no reason to exclude his parents from the people deeply affected by this tragedy.

"One of the first things you ask is the 'why' question. Why my child? And what if my son had been sick and hadn't gone to school? You ask the why question, which is...unanswerable."

The parents of Cho Seung-Hui are asking those very questions right now. They mourn their child deeply, with good reason: their beloved son, whom they loved; the child they held as so precious, so dear; he was one of the 33 killed by a ruthless murderer at Virginia Tech.

He was the very first one to die.

Amen. Sting said it about the Russians, and I'll say it about others.

The shooters love their children too.

I guess my original point was, the media will most likely crucify the parents - people who, while certainly responsible for the upbringing of their child, could not possibly be held responsible for the actions of a 23-year-old.

For me, I feel for them deeply. They've lost their child, which is hard enough for ANY parent; but they now have the added burden of knowing their son is responsible for the deaths of 32 others, and will now be crucified over the mainstream media for who knows how long.

Do I support Cho's actions? A million times, no; but the fact of the matter is, now his parents will be forced to watch their dear child being torn apart in front of their eyes on national television. I think they're suffering the greatest out of anybody - they'll have to carry the burden of their son's infamy for the rest of their lives.

Amen. Sting said it about the Russians, and I'll say it about others.

The shooters love their children too.

What the hell are you talking about? The shooters didn't HAVE children.

The shooters' parents, however....

BTW, that Sting song is patently ridiculous. Of course the Russians love their children. Loving one's children neither makes you special nor does it make warfare or other unfortunate crimes against humanity somehow impossible.

What the hell are you talking about? The shooters didn't HAVE children.

The shooters' parents, however....

BTW, that Sting song is patently ridiculous. Of course the Russians love their children. Loving one's children neither makes you special nor does it make warfare or other unfortunate crimes against humanity somehow impossible.

What I meant to say was that they are just as human as the rest of us. And I don't really like that song either.

BTW, that Sting song is patently ridiculous. Of course the Russians love their children. Loving one's children neither makes you special nor does it make warfare or other unfortunate crimes against humanity somehow impossible.

of course the point of the song, was that during the cold war, the Americans were basically told that everyone in the Soviet Union were monsters who would kill us in our sleep if we weren't careful. Sting was just making a point, that the CITIZENS of the Soviet Union were just that, citizens, people...not unlike the Americans...and, that they were indoctrinated that all Americans were monsters, that we all had one finger on the big red button, that we would kill them in their sleep.


As for Virginia Tech, it's horrible, and only natural to ask why. We'll never know WHY. My heart hurts every time I see it on TV. I don't think it's better or worse than Darfur, or The Congo...I think it's different, because it's sudden. We don't expect to turn on our television and see that there are 33 dead people on a college campus. In the US, there is very little coverage about Darfur, or any of those other places...is that terrible, absolutely...should Americans be more aware, yes...but we aren't. Also, sadly, society as a whole expects there to be governments somewhere that are oppressing their citizens. Again, it isn't right, and it is horrible, but it's been a fact of life that there is always a country who is not as industrialized as much of the world, that has a dictator or military regime that is oppressing it's people.

I just wish people would stop pointing fingers. Saying that the college and the police did something wrong. They did what they could with the information they had. If you listen to the 911 call, it appeared to clearly be a domestic type dispute. No one had any reason to think that it was going to be anything more than that. It's going to take a long time for people to heal, I think