Virginia Tech shooting

[Pannonian]

First off, I thought that many Americans pretend to be Christian. Possibly the power of forgiveness?

Then As Adrian rightly mentions: possibly the family might not be aware of what their on was going to do, and you are jumping to conclusions faster than a Tabloid newspaper?

There's a good chance the family have nothing to say sorry for. Oh, and they've also lost a son who has probably done something that they find as horrific as everyone else.

What has Hitler got to do with anything?

Best keep the poisonous rants to yourself, eh?

It was my impression that families (Asian ones anyway) are supposed to be responsible for their issue. If they don't hold themselves responsible for him, then let the press do it for them. If there's a screwy family that led to this ill-produced scion, let the press uncover it. If the problems are deeper rooted as in the massively dysfunctional Japanese society, let the press discuss that as well. But this is one of those cases where vengeance and constructive investigation go hand in hand.

Page 4 reminder announcement:

Keep it to the topic, not the poster.

Kindly carry on.

Sorry about my rather savage post, but the harming of Holocaust survivors is one of the few issues to make me really react - another related one being exploitation of the Holocaust that cheapens its memory.

[drone]

If the problems are deeper rooted as in the massively dysfunctional Japanese society, let the press discuss that as well.

He's a South Korean immigrant, not Japanese.

[Pannonian]

He's a South Korean immigrant, not Japanese.

I was using Japanese society as an example of how the roots may go back further than any individual or family. If the investigations of those various incidents hadn't looked at the family, and at the wider society as a whole, would people be as aware of the depth of the problem?

This guy's family should be looking at themselves and asking how he came to be like this, and the deceased's families deserve to know the answers. The press in its various guises can serve as both carrot and stick with which to find answers to the question "Why?". If the family isn't inclined to go public with the results, IMHO an incident of this kind and severity gives the press the right to look for the answers themselves. And if this is an intrusion into their family's privacy - tough cheese.

[drone]

This guy's family should be looking at themselves and asking how he came to be like this, and the deceased's families deserve to know the answers. The press in its various guises can serve as both carrot and stick with which to find answers to the question "Why?". If the family isn't inclined to go public with the results, IMHO an incident of this kind and severity gives the press the right to look for the answers themselves. And if this is an intrusion into their family's privacy - tough cheese.

I'd bet the press is all over the family already. I'm pretty sure I know where they live, and I'm also sure I'm going to have to fight through the tent city sprouting around the place on the way home.

On the gun issue, I saw that he passed a background check done in 2003 for his green card renewal. So he would not have had any problems purchasing a firearm legally.

[Ser Clegane]

Pannonian, please remember that their parents of the shooter also lost their child - probably in a more complete way than other people, as they not only lost the life of their son but also the memory of their son as what is left to them is the fact that their child murdered 30+ people, the more or less open accusation that they as parents are at least to some degree also guilty of what happened and probably also their own feeling that they are at least partly responsible because they should have done something different to prevent this tragedy from happening.

Unless you have a very good reason to believe that these parents are somehow also responsible for what happened, they have IMHO the sme right of privacy as any other parents who lost their children in this shooting. Your "tough cheese" comment seems quite inappropriate here
(NB: this is not a comment in my function as Backroom moderator, but my opinion as an Backroom-patron)

[Sir Moody]

Are you familiar with trap shotguns, hunting shotguns, hunting rifles, target pistols, .22 rifles, and a plethora of others clearly not designed to kill people?

wow all of those guns you just listed can kill people even if they wernt designed too and most were still designed to kill (animals if not people but remmeber we are animals and what kills a deer will kill us just as easily)

the only 2 you have there which i cant argue with are the Trap shotgun (a slight varient on the nomal shotgun designed to blow little plates out of the air ) - and the Target pistol (designed for professional shooting aka sport) - these are exceptions to the norm that arose from the tried and tested and most definatly designed to kill guns we see far more oftenly - congratualtions

[Geoffrey S]

Pannonian, get off it. Until there are any facts to back your reasoning about the shooter's family, please keep those opinions to yourself. And no, it is not always possible to notice when someone might lose it; the sister of a friend of mine committed suicide, and absolutely no-one saw it coming, and there sure as heck was nothing wrong with the family.

[JimBob]

Pannonian seriously. 34 families lost loved ones. This guy wasn't some robot, he was a person with a history and a family. I'm pretty sure that family loved him. Now they are not only grieving because they lost a family member but because he went out in a horrific way. Then to have people calling for a witch trial?

Maybe the guy was just broken in the head through no fault of the parents except genetics. But if are going to hold them accountable for their genes I assume you've yelled at ever cancer patient's parents as well.

[Pannonian]

Pannonian, get off it. Until there are any facts to back your reasoning about the shooter's family, please keep those opinions to yourself. And no, it is not always possible to notice when someone might lose it; the sister of a friend of mine committed suicide, and absolutely no-one saw it coming, and there sure as heck was nothing wrong with the family.

Are you suggesting that the question shouldn't be asked? I used the example of Japanese society to illustrate my point - if the question "Why?" hadn't been asked of all the various incidents, would people be as aware of the poisonous results of a society dedicated entirely to work? As I said, this is one case where vengeance and constructive investigation go hand in hand. Vengeance means the killer's family gives up their right to privacy until this is satisfactorily cleared up. The answers are then used as part of a wider investigation to minimise the chances of something like this happening again. Is there owt wrong with this?

Re: Ser Clegane. Fair enough.

Re: Jimbob. I subscribe to the social conditioning school rather than genetics. If someone goes berserk, IMHO their life history, including upbringing, usually offers a better explanation than their genes.

[Ser Clegane]

Vengeance means the killer's family gives up their right to privacy until this is satisfactorily cleared up.

Investigations can certainly be done without dragging the parents into the spotlight?
Also, how come that the killer's family becomes a default subject of "vengeance"? I would have thought that we moved a bit beyond "Sippenhaft"

[Pannonian]

Investigations can certainly be done without dragging the parents into the spotlight?
Also, how come that the killer's family becomes a default subject of "vengeance"? I would have thought that we moved a bit beyond "Sippenhaft"

Letting the press ask the questions is civilised society's most constructive form of vengeance. It's unpleasant enough to act as such, and constructive enough to help work towards solving any wider social problems. The killer can't be jailed, the killer can't be rehabilitated, so the usual forms of state punishment no longer apply. In its absence, why not ask the question "Why?".

I've noted that people have ignored my conditional point, that the family had better make a good show of remorse, which I elaborated as asking themselves how he came to be like this, and letting the public know the answers. If they do this, there is no need for the press to press them further - the point of making them ask the difficult questions and helping society avoid incidents like this in the future has been served. The families of the 7/7 bombers did the same, helping the police investigate the histories of their sons, and the result is we now have a better knowledge of their roots and causes. And once the questions had been answered, they were allowed to retreat back into privacy. Is there anything wrong with this?

[Scurvy]

I said, this is one case where vengeance and constructive investigation go hand in hand.

vengence on who? the killer killed the people, not his family.

furthermore the press are hardly interested in finding out the truth.. they just want a good story, im sure we'l be finding out that his mother was feeding him the wrong sort of food soon...

Vengeance means the killer's family gives up their right to privacy until this is satisfactorily cleared up

has it occured to you that they might have done nothing wrong?

--> a bit of sympathy and respect is needed for a family who will be grieving like all the others....

the question should be asked, but by the right people at the right time.

[ajaxfetish]

Pannonian,

No one has responded to your position by arguing that an investigation shouldn't be made. Clearly the more information we can bring in the better off we'll be. The problem is the harsh vitriol you are exhibiting against individuals who have done nothing wrong that we know of. For one thing, I don't believe vengeance is of any value period. For another, why should vengeance against a criminal be taken against his parents? They did not shoot anyone. There is no evidence to suggest they influenced their son's shooting. Why should they be punished for his crimes?

I appreciate your intense reaction to the killing of a holocaust survivor and recognize that may be responsible for your seemingly irrational response. It seems highly doubtful that this had any bearing on the professor's killing. The killer didn't single him out, and may not have even been aware he was a holocaust survivor. This certainly has nothing to do with the parents. Be kind, and give the poor people the benefit of the doubt. A thorough investigation is important, but condemning people without any such investigation being made is not helpful.

Ajax

[KukriKhan]

Now, another reminder:

If you're a regular poster or reader here, you've seen what happens among the great minds here, when event details become slim: we start in on each other's words.

This usually starts happening about page 3 and post #75, or so.

I urge all to resist that natural urge to try to draw conclusions before enough details are available, AND the other natural reaction to frustration (at the lack of detail) to strike out at the handiest target - our fellow posters.

Sorry for the length of this announcement, and its distraction.

Please continue, civilly.

[Lemur]

Well, it hasn't taken long for various loonbats to grab onto this event and fit it into their agenda. I see the Westboro Baptist Church plans to picket the funerals. "Jerks" doesn't quite do them justice. Also, Jack Thompson has declared that violent video games are to blame. Note that he came to this conclusion before anyone knew the identity of the shooter.

Not to mention how pro- and anti-gun folks (including some of our own) have leaped in to tell us how this tragedy reinforces their positions.

I guess it's natural to look for meaning in something this nasty. Personally, I'm still adopting a wait and see mode.

[Pannonian]

Pannonian,

No one has responded to your position by arguing that an investigation shouldn't be made. Clearly the more information we can bring in the better off we'll be. The problem is the harsh vitriol you are exhibiting against individuals who have done nothing wrong that we know of. For one thing, I don't believe vengeance is of any value period. For another, why should vengeance against a criminal be taken against his parents? They did not shoot anyone. There is no evidence to suggest they influenced their son's shooting. Why should they be punished for his crimes?

In Britain, there was the case of a black kid who was murdered by a gang of white youths. Police incompetence with the hint of corruption led to the destruction or loss of all useable evidence, and the case collapsed. The press took up the case, allowing the family of the deceased to bring a private prosecution against the accused, and forcing the police to clean up their incompetence and/or racism.

Stephen Lawrence

[Geoffrey S]

Are you suggesting that the question shouldn't be asked? I used the example of Japanese society to illustrate my point - if the question "Why?" hadn't been asked of all the various incidents, would people be as aware of the poisonous results of a society dedicated entirely to work? As I said, this is one case where vengeance and constructive investigation go hand in hand. Vengeance means the killer's family gives up their right to privacy until this is satisfactorily cleared up. The answers are then used as part of a wider investigation to minimise the chances of something like this happening again. Is there owt wrong with this?

No, I never suggested such a thing. "Why?" is a perfectly valid question to ask, considering that right now we now next to nothing about the origins of the tragedy. The post I responded was filled with preconceptions about the shooter's family, who as Ser Clegane rightly pointed also lost their relative in both body and mind, in a situation where you clearly cannot know the facts yet. What I would suggest is to allow some more time before jumping to conclusions.

Edit: Sasaki, good post. The more I hear about this, the more chilling it becomes. A horrible, horrible situation.

[doc_bean]

It was my impression that families (Asian ones anyway)

WTF ? It's their responsibility because they're Asian ? Different rules apply to Asian families ?

BS, this kid was obviously messed up, who knows why at this point ?