NationStates Jolt Archive

I didn't see a link to this posted on NSG yet, so, here it is, a link to the report by the Report of the Virginia Tech Review Panel (http://www.governor.virginia.gov/TempContent/techPanelReport.cfm).

Each part is in a pdf, but each pdf is small so it shouldn't slow your computer while it loads.

I highly encourage people to read the report before posting reactions to it. It's written in layman's English, with appendices for more indepth information.

From what I read so far, I feel extreme sympathy for Cho's parents who tried to do so much for him and now live in the shadow of his choice. They appear from the report to have good intentions and hard working people who are like any other parent.

One thing this report does is gives a shining review of the police's response give the restrictions they faced and their respect for VT's policies. It says the police could have done more but in light of certain rules, the police were restricted.

The review panel also gives recommendations and it's a fairly neutral in its response governing firearms, recommending that clear restrictions be placed on who cannot acquire firearms, as laws at the time were vague in some respects. It even going as far as to suggest that the act banning lethal firearms may not have completely prevented the massacre.

The report notes that there were inconsistencies in the law governing firearms and how the state and federal government conduct background checks. Some states use the federal database, others use both while some use just the state. Exceptions for private transactions exist. The report suggests that the inconsistencies was something that allowed for Cho, who was banned under federal law, to acquire the firearms because Virginia state law at the time was vague.

I found that part interesting. It was intriguing to read about US gun laws a little more. It was also striking that background checks aren't done the same across the board.

NOTE: My intention is to have a discussion about the report and to see people's reactions. Tensions may run high and passions will ignite emotions but let's keep it clean. :)

I found the report to be well done.

The problem in Virginia is that at the time, people who were mentally ill did not necessarily get into the database that is used for the background check when you purchase a firearm.

So the background check didn't find anything wrong when he purchased the gun.

There are other problems aside from the gun purchase check.

His parents had him in a special program - here in Fairfax County (I live in this county) the schools identified him as having major psychological and learning problems - and adapted to help him.

When he enrolled at VT, his parents told VT none of this. None of this was forwarded as part of his transcript during the admission process.

When he was subject to court-ordered psychological care, there was no mechanism in place to require him to go.

The campus police had no idea he was really dangerous because no one told them.

The school might have saved a few lives (but not prevented the attack) had they sounded some kind of alert and done a lockdown after the first shooting.

A lot of this is failed communication between people who knew he was a nutjob and the people who could have done something to stop it.

I found the report to be well done.

The problem in Virginia is that at the time, people who were mentally ill did not necessarily get into the database that is used for the background check when you purchase a firearm.

So the background check didn't find anything wrong when he purchased the gun.

There are other problems aside from the gun purchase check.

His parents had him in a special program - here in Fairfax County (I live in this county) the schools identified him as having major psychological and learning problems - and adapted to help him.

When he enrolled at VT, his parents told VT none of this. None of this was forwarded as part of his transcript during the admission process.

When he was subject to court-ordered psychological care, there was no mechanism in place to require him to go.

The campus police had no idea he was really dangerous because no one told them.

The school might have saved a few lives (but not prevented the attack) had they sounded some kind of alert and done a lockdown after the first shooting.

A lot of this is failed communication between people who knew he was a nutjob and the people who could have done something to stop it.

Which we all pretty much knew to be the case but it is good to have it in writing. Hopefully some good will come from this.

Which we all pretty much knew to be the case but it is good to have it in writing. Hopefully some good will come from this.

What was noted in this report was that other universities used this to review their own security policies regarding how to handle emergencies, as well as handling individual students who may pose a legitimate threat.

RO - I agree that there was a failure of communication on many levels.

What was noted in this report was that other universities used this to review their own security policies regarding how to handle emergencies, as well as handling individual students who may pose a legitimate threat.

Indeed. Even my university conducted a review of security policies and the Student Senate was even briefed on it. Luckily, I attended a small campus so it makes security abit easier and our cops respond to problems and solves them quickly. Hell I even seen our cops in actions and you don't mess with them.

Indeed. Even my university conducted a review of security policies and the Student Senate was even briefed on it. Luckily, I attended a small campus so it makes security abit easier and our cops respond to problems and solves them quickly. Hell I even seen our cops in actions and you don't mess with them.

Indeed.

That is something the panel noted that uniform policies aren't ideal and that each college and university should make its own assessment based on a number of contributing factors, since smaller schools have different needs than a larger one like VT.

I remember at my school, we had a security guard escort service for students who stayed late and had to walk to a bus stop or car. They had the option of having a companion in order to ensure their safety. This option was primarily given to female students but was offered equally to male students. Even when I was at the smallest campus for my school we had this option.

Indeed.

That is something the panel noted that uniform policies aren't ideal and that each college and university should make its own assessment based on a number of contributing factors, since smaller schools have different needs than a larger one like VT.

I remember at my school, we had a security guard escort service for students who stayed late and had to walk to a bus stop or car. They had the option of having a companion in order to ensure their safety. This option was primarily given to female students but was offered equally to male students. Even when I was at the smallest campus for my school we had this option.

I could not agree more. My campus also has police escort service as well. It is a wonderful program though I never utilized it.