Do you believe that the tragedy at Virginia Tech could have been avoided if?

Question

Do you believe that the tragedy at Virginia Tech could have been avoided if Cho's professors had done more than just refer him to on campus counseling? Based on two short plays he had written which the media has gotten a hold of, it seems obvious that he was seriously emotionally disturbed.

http://news.aol.com/virginia-tech-shootings/cho-seung-hui/_a/mr-brownstone-title-page/20070417141309990001

http://news.aol.com/virginia-tech-shootings/cho-seung-hui/_a/richard-mcbeef-cover-page/20070417134109990001

I'm not saying that he should have been thrown out of school, or anything like that, I just believe that there should have been some sort of follow up done on the teachers recommendations for counseling.

Yo it's me*** I agree with what you say, except for the part about him still being able to purchase a gun if he had been forced into treatment. In Virginia, once someone has been forcibly committed, they can no longer legally purchase a gun. However, he still could have gotten it illegally.

The Oracle*** I understand what you are saying, and maybe I should have clarified my reasoning sooner. These professors were also able to interact with this student on a weekly basis. They were able to observe his personality and character along with his writings. I am not trying to blame anyone, I just can't help but wonder if this could have been prevented had someone taken more than a passing interest in this particular student.

Answer 1

Perhaps. But there are many many nutjobs on campuses all over the country. It is pretty difficult to predict who would go on a mass killing rampage. I do not hold the professors at fault. It is not their job to go looking around for potential mass murderers. I go to the University of Michigan, and it seems a very similar incident (with the profs and weird kids) occured many years ago with the Unabomber.

Update: It seems that I am the only one who has answered the question so far.

Answer 2

I read the plays, and they certainly are violent. But I'm cautious not to take these two plays out of context; I mean, we're not told if Cho wrote 40 plays, and all the other 38 were about prancing unicorns and sunny summer days. It's easy for us to look at two isolated scripts, and say "oh, everyone should have known".

The problem with creative writing is that it's supposed to be creative, and, in disciplines such as English writing and drama, we must make a distinction between art and life. A lot of the time, teachers push students to explore their creative boundaries, and to even explore taboo or controversial material.

I mean, look at William Shakespeare. If you want to read King Lear, it has really terrible violence - eyes being ripped out of live skulls, and nasty, nasty deaths. In King John, there is another scene where a prisoner's eyes are to be put out with hot pokers. And Romeo and Juliet, a high-school staple, features teen suicide. A lot of other drama and writing has equally - and even more graphic - violence.

But we study this stuff openly in English classes everywhere - it's even considered fine literature. And then, when you compare the violence in literature and the violence imagined by screen writers, directors and producers for many of Hollywood's most celebrated movies and films, Cho's writing really pales into insignificance. I mean, look at "Silence of the Lambs," or any one of the three films in the "Saw" trilogy, which features people's ribcages being ripped open while they're still alive, and people being forced to put their own hands into acid. That's way nastier than Cho's writings, but it made the film producers multi millions.

Because of the graphic nature of a lot of material in English, Drama, and Arts - and because we don't know if Cho wrote other plays that weren't of this orientation, I think it's difficult to condemn his teachers for not "recognising" the "warning signs".

Otherwise, we should probably lock up a great many of the world's best writers and artists in the name of safety and security. And we should probably shut down Hollywood while we're at it.... minds that twisted should be referred to counselling, right?

Answer 3

It's pretty hard to do much more from a legal/privacy/free speech point of view. Look at some of the creepy movies and video games out there, people write those, would you want them to be analyzed or locked up on the basis that they aren't normal and that they might do something crazy? Look at the books written by Senator James Webb (D-VA) some pretty sick stuff, but he is out walking around free.

Hey Tapestry - you can thank President Jimmy Carter for putting the mentally ill out on the streets. Law of unintended consequences, yes locking them up was cruel, but having them wander around unmedicated seems cruel too. Had this guy been forced into inpatient treatment, he would have been out in a few weeks to months and probably would have been able to purchase guns (even though mental illness is a reason to not be allowed to own any gun).

Answer 4

Hind sight is 20/20 and most people can not imagine a person committing such a act of violence and therefore they just try to look at the person as weird and let it go . Most people who commit these types of crimes show a long list of symptoms long before it occurs. Majority of the times the person is on medication which usually causes adverse effects or makes the illness much worse believe it or not. Better education and awareness on mental illness could have prevented this tragedy!

Answer 5

I dont' think they have hospitals for the mentally disturbed anymore. They are usually wandering the streets pushing shopping baskets. When the 'powers that be' set up the privacy act it said that mentally disturbed people had to give permission in order to be committed.. well of course they won't, so instead of being in a hospital getting the right meds to make them productive they wander and if they are really off kilter they will kill.
So until someone comes up with the right combination of urgency and common sense the people who should have help will never get it.

Answer 6

Yes, but the major part could have been avoided if the campus police had shut down the campus immediately after the first two shootings. Those students should have been immediately told not to go to class, and there should have been swat teams all over that campus.

Answer 7

I more believe that this wouldn't have happened if the President of the University would have warned them when it happened. I'm sure students would still end up dead, but not as many. But, hey, you never know... what's done is done.


And the first writer is a dumbas.s. Oh yes, let's give everyone guns that way when one person is pissed off at someone for a stupid reason, oh, simple way to resolve it, shoot them! No, that's bullshi.t. That would make it so much worse, and so many more students would end up dead.

Answer 8

The only way this massacre and the many others in the last ten years could have been avoided is if the US stopped messing with the brain chemistry of their youth.

ALL of the gun-related massacres that have made headlines over the past decade were perpetrated by people taking SSRIs [anti depressants].

http://www.antidepressantsfacts.com/casualties.htm
http://www.teenscreentruth.com/psychiatry_drugs_suicide.html
http://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/

Answer 9

Have you ever seen a QuintinTarantino movie? Talk about disturbing, huh? Want to bet that someone isn't already considering the production of Cho's plays?

Answer 10

I hate to Mondya Morning Quarterback, but beyond your suggestion, the University Administration should have cancelled classes for the day. You have a murder on campus, the murderer is still at large, you don't go on as if nothing's happened. The families of the victims should sue the school. I don't normally support lawsuits, but this one has to happen.