Ok, as I understood the college president and police chief at the press conference, they interviewed people at the Dorm building
WHY??? They said they "had reason to believe he had left the campus and perhaps even the state". So they "secured the building". The President said it wouldn't make sense to lock down the whole campus because thousands of students were "in transit" to class.
This is really weird.
a) If they interviewed people and they had "reason to believe" what the shooter's motives were, why don't they tell us they know who he is? Clearly someone in that dorm recognized him.
b) Why only "secure the building" when the only thing you're sure of is that he's NOT IN THE BUILDING????
c) If thousands of students were in transit, why not send out a message, make a radio broadcast, do whatever to tell people to TRANSIT AWAY FROM THE CAMPUS SINCE THERE IS A GUNMAN ON THE LOOSE!?!?!!?
Instead, they waited until the shooter was dead to send out their first email. Brilliant.
2007-04-16 11:08:27 · 9 answers · asked by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
KM - thanks for the rhetoric. Could you have used "personal responsibility" to save yourself today? Wouldn't you rather have had the information?
2007-04-16 11:18:42 · update #1
picesski - you also have to realize that the students at the dorm might have mentioned that he had several weapons and an "ungodly" amount of ammunition. Doesn't that lead you to think it's time to take drastic action, instead of waiting 2 hours doing nothing????
2007-04-16 11:19:48 · update #2
One potential reason for delaying the email is because they wanted to gather more information before alerting the students to avoid mass hysteria. Perhaps they also wanted to keep the shooter from going on a kamikaze mission and taking out more students by alerting him/her that they were on to what just happened.
2007-04-16 11:17:53 · answer #1 · answered by piscesski 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I can understand where they were coming from. A shooting at a dorm might NOT HAVE BEEN RANDOM. It may have been a personal vendetta or something like that.
With hindsight we can complain now, but I am sure they did not think that this man was going to go in a classroom and kill other students. And he did it much further away and a good while later. No one could have predicted what he was going to do afterwards.
Shooting two people might have been all he was after. If he was going to shoot more people, why not close to the first shooting?
With the distance and time between the two shootings, it was easy for the campus heads to assume it was over.
2007-04-16 11:25:21 · answer #2 · answered by Nirmala S 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I can't figure it out either. I know people were in transit. Someone is always in transit on any college campus. I think they should have blocked access to the university so at least those who lived off campus would not go to school. As far as handling the kids on campus, that would be a logistic nightmare.
They obviously know more than they are willing to share. I don't know why since the gunman is dead.
2007-04-16 11:13:51 · answer #3 · answered by Patti C 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Considering that Tech is relatively centrally located and more than 2 hours from any state borders, how the hell would this guy have left the state? And why wasn't there some sort of announcement or other notification sent out letting the students know what happened immediately so that precautions could have been taken?
2007-04-16 11:39:05 · answer #4 · answered by badkitty1969 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
some human beings have faith God instructed us what became into precise and incorrect. Others have faith that we've stepped forward regulations and morals to enable the human race to prosper. some have faith that faith became into further approximately as a potential to enforce those. Believing or no longer believing in God does no longer dictate who's morally more suitable. truly, some incredibly hideous behaviour has been finished interior the call of religion. Believing in God does no longer make a guy or woman more suitable in intelect or morals. it truly is fairly risky to confuse the two. in this condition, this guy or woman became into no longer likely to be stopped. Pleading with him that it became into against God's will could have in all probability made issues worse. It became right into a protracted term plan and he knew the outcomes (it truly is why he killed himself). One could ask God how he ought to enable this to ensue? ought to he no longer have struck down this guy with a lightning bolt? the reply to that i'll go away to those who've a perception equipment centred around God. i do no longer. I desire to have faith that this guy became into remoted, lonely, indignant and mentally disturbed.
2016-12-16 07:42:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The email went out before the second shooting began. If you want to blame someone blame the shooter. This blame "the man" for every injustice is getting old!
2007-04-16 11:13:04 · answer #6 · answered by Bosspooba 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I totally agree!!!!!!!
Immediately after the first shooting, the powers that be should have shut that campus down!!!!!. The president was only thinking about his own job and not the welfare of the students.
2007-04-16 11:15:24 · answer #7 · answered by rrh2 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Perhaps, we rely too much on officials to keep us safe. Perhaps, just perhaps, it's time to take some personal responsibility for keeping your person and property safe from terrorists and various nut-cases.
Just a thought.
2007-04-16 11:14:24 · answer #8 · answered by Varcan 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm actually surprised they weren't more reactive because VT isn't incredibly far from some of the places the Beltway sniper took out victims back in 2003.
Are they total morons? Probably...most people are.
2007-04-16 11:12:35 · answer #9 · answered by Karin 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋