31 Dead at Virginia Tech

There’s really nothing to say about this other than it’s incredibly sad. And it’s the deadliest campus shooting in American history.

I hope you’ll take a moment to send prayers or kind thoughts to the people at Virginia Tech, and to the families and friends of those killed and injured.

UPDATE: The death toll is up to 31. Ugh.

UPDATE 2: Early reports are saying that the shooter was looking for his girlfriend. While I’m sure this will be reported as “another crazy guy shoots up a school,” it’s worth noting the theme of misogyny that permeates so many of these shootings.


Similar Posts (automatically generated):

262 comments for “31 Dead at Virginia Tech

  1. April 16, 2007 at 1:23 pm

    There isn’t a lot of information available right now, so it’s difficult to know how to react except for with shock and horror and of course, sadness.

  2. RKMK
    April 16, 2007 at 1:36 pm

    Jesus.

  3. Sally
    April 16, 2007 at 1:57 pm

    Fuck. I don’t even know what to say about that.

  4. April 16, 2007 at 2:05 pm

    The more progressive we become, the more backlash. This seems analogous to how porn has become more violent and kinky since women started legally counting as people. And why? It’s part hate, misunderstanding, immaturity. But I think what is taboo will always make someone very, very rich if they learn how to sell it right.

    Why do we go to see slasher/horror films? What is so intriguing about violence? Why are we surprised by these things?

    This is incredibly sad news. I don’t know what else to say.

  5. April 16, 2007 at 2:10 pm

    I notice Dubya prefaced his remarks about the shooting by playing to his base with an affirmation of the right to keep and bear arms.

  6. Myca
    April 16, 2007 at 2:14 pm

    What do you want to bet the shooter was a misogynist twit, too?

  7. Mat
    April 16, 2007 at 2:17 pm

    Most recent reports I’ve seen have the death toll up to 31.

    Christ.

  8. twf
    April 16, 2007 at 2:17 pm

    Myca,

    I wouldn’t be surprised. Early rumours are he was looking for his girlfriend.

  9. Sally
    April 16, 2007 at 2:31 pm

    I notice Dubya prefaced his remarks about the shooting by playing to his base with an affirmation of the right to keep and bear arms.

    You must be fucking kidding me. The guy shot up a dorm full of kids at 7:15 in the morning. What does Bush think is supposed to happen? College students should sleep with rifles under their pillows? There is no way in hell to make this anything but an argument against the ready availability of guns.

    The Times is now reporting 31 people dead. It sounds like probably most of them were students.

  10. Myca
    April 16, 2007 at 2:35 pm

    Early rumours are he was looking for his girlfriend.

    Oh my god. I’m nauseous.

  11. lindsay
    April 16, 2007 at 2:39 pm

    That’s why my roommate and I keep our dorm room door locked all the time. I don’t trust a damn soul.

    Stuff like this scares me because I’m on a college campus, and we’re all so close together that if something like that happened here, it would be absolute chaos. It makes me a little less eager to go outside.

  12. April 16, 2007 at 2:46 pm

    Two relatives of mine, a husband-and-wife pair, teach at Virginia Tech. If his office hadn’t been recently moved, and if she hadn’t forgotten her purse in his office last night and had to go get it this morning before she could go to her office, they might have been in the engineering building when it happened.

    I am pretty shaken. We never expect something like this could possibly touch anyone we know.

    There’s really nothing anyone can say at this point.

  13. R. Mildred
    April 16, 2007 at 2:53 pm

    That’s why my roommate and I keep our dorm room door locked all the time.

    well he shot through some doors, or tried to, by the sound of it – some students managed to barricade themselves in but he still tried to blast through, thankfully he didn’t succeed in the cases the bbc is reporting.

    I’m waiting for Kos to declare the dead to all be pussies – they should have thicker skins obviously if they’re going to live in the rough and tumble world of a tech college.

    And I wonder who the reactionaries are gonna blame, I’ll bet computer games or possibly promiscuous aborting lesbian bloggers – who’s got access to FOX, what’s their take on this?

  14. April 16, 2007 at 2:55 pm

    Early reports are saying that the shooter was looking for his girlfriend

    Ouch. I am sad and angry and feeling helpless.

    Chatted with a friend of mine half an hour ago — Chinese-American; she lamented “Why did he have to be Asian?” She’s worried about backlash.

  15. April 16, 2007 at 2:59 pm

    Jack Thompson wasted no time in blaming videogames.

    Which makes him both a ghoul and an asshole, a new hybrid I christen the Ghoulhole.

  16. Bitter Scribe
    April 16, 2007 at 3:00 pm

    Apparently it’s no longer just the deadliest campus shooting. It’s the deadliest American shooting, period.

    What the hell is wrong with this country?

  17. April 16, 2007 at 3:09 pm

    Lindsay,

    Locking your door is smart. If you can, though, try to remember that college and school shootings are relatively uncommon. This doesn’t make them any less tragic or any less horrifying.

    It seems like every time we turn around we’re hearing another story, and it would be a much better world if, when this sort of calamity happened, we couldn’t go “Oh fuck. Not again.” But really, the number of marauding psychos is a lot smaller than the number of, say, distracted drivers on city streets.

    I went away to university two years after the Montreal Massacre, at a time when rape and sexual on campus were receiving increasing attention in the media. It seemed like every time you turned around, someone was telling you how unsafe campus was, how someone else had been hurt or damaged, how terrible things could happen.

    What they didn’t tell us was that for every person hurt on campus or at a party, millions weren’t. Millions of students went through their university careers, dated, went to parties, went to class, took their exams, studied late at the library, and while I won’t claim that their lives were perfect or that everyone emerges from university or college unscathed, they didn’t get shot or attacked. I won’t parrot “best time of your life” nonsense. College can be brutal.

    But if you can, think about what you’re giving up by letting the (relatively small number of) crazy people and killers make you afraid to do what you have every right to do.

  18. April 16, 2007 at 3:10 pm

    Oh my god…

    That’s all..

    damn…

    I…

  19. Blitzgal
    April 16, 2007 at 3:10 pm

    It really irritates me that after Columbine everyone was wringing their hands wondering what to do about goth kids and Marilyn Manson, yet no one cares to point out the gendered violence going on in so many of these mass killings. I noticed in the Wikipedia article linked above that the sexual assaults of the hostages in the Platte Canyon High case this past fall were just mentioned in passing. There should be an entire section in that article discussing the broader implications of the fact that this guy kept the “attractive” girls as hostages so he could sexually assault them, and how it ties in with other similar incidents in which men have directly targeted women and/or girls in their rampages.

  20. lucizoe
    April 16, 2007 at 3:12 pm

    Ugh. I’ve been trying to avoid all the coverage of this that I can, but atheist me was walking home thinking to myself, “Dear god, please please please don’t let all the victims be women. Please.”

    Looking for his girlfriend, huh?

    I was going to ask why sociopaths like this manage to get through life without someone noticing, but I already know the answer to that, so why bother. This is all so sickening.

  21. April 16, 2007 at 3:17 pm

    Why does this shit always go down around mid-April? Oklahoma City (April 19), Colombine (April 20), VA Tech (April 16). Surely just a coincidence, but maybe “cruelest month” Eliot had a point.

  22. R. Mildred
    April 16, 2007 at 3:18 pm

    Chatted with a friend of mine half an hour ago — Chinese-American; she lamented “Why did he have to be Asian?” She’s worried about backlash.

    Where are you/she hearing that he was asian if I may ask?

  23. JustaGuy
    April 16, 2007 at 3:25 pm

    Obviously, this is a terrible tragedy. I think it’s a little early to jump to any conclusions on who, what, when, where and why.

    I will say this, VT had a strict no gun policy. This just shows that a criminal will disobey the law no matter what the rule is. I can also tell you, with this kind of body count, this guy was not your average nut with a pistol and a few extra magazines.

    There’s definately more to the story but that can wait… right now about the only thing we can do is pray or whatever you do in times like this.

  24. Vinegar
    April 16, 2007 at 3:28 pm

    There are some rumors going about that the shooter was Asian. FOX showed images of an East-Asian-looking guy getting patted down on the ground, which is where I think the rumor got started, even though all the reports have said the shooter is dead.

  25. April 16, 2007 at 3:31 pm

    Blitzgal: It’s easier to ban music than it is to ban patriarchy.

  26. DAS
    April 16, 2007 at 3:34 pm

    Why does this shit always go down around mid-April? Oklahoma City (April 19), Colombine (April 20), VA Tech (April 16). Surely just a coincidence, but maybe “cruelest month” Eliot had a point. – Hugo

    Could allergies be a factor?

    When I had bad allergy problems as a teen, I didn’t go shooting people, but they certainly did enhance the already normal problems a teen has with changing hormones, etc., and made me double loopy — I’d have brown-outs, etc. And when they gave me corticosteroids for the allergies, I got ‘roid rage besides (and some anti-histamines also cause rage in succeptable people — ever see what happens when you give a kid too much diphenhydramine? they don’t just fall asleep like an adult would).

    I wonder if in susceptable young men, the combination of allergies, anti-histamines and stress might just end up being too much.

    But yes, the gender issues are important and getting ignored. Even in the Columbine case, bullying was at issue and usually gender issues get involved there too (a lot of bullies make fun of their prey for being “girly”). You don’t have to believe in Freud to also wonder whether, well, a gun stands for something …

  27. nausicaa
    April 16, 2007 at 3:35 pm

    Why does this shit always go down around mid-April?

    I’ve heard it said that spring brings on manic episodes in bipolar disease. Mania can be very aggressive.

  28. twf
    April 16, 2007 at 3:35 pm

    Where are you/she hearing that he was asian if I may ask?

    There’s an interview from MSNBC with one of the shooting victims.

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=67f_1176750363&p=1

  29. Mandolin
    April 16, 2007 at 3:42 pm

    “I’ve heard it said that spring brings on manic episodes in bipolar disease.”

    That sounds very odd, like someone confusing SAD and bipolar.

  30. April 16, 2007 at 3:43 pm

    This is the end of the semester. All the attendant pressures are at a boil right about now in a school year.

  31. Sally
    April 16, 2007 at 3:44 pm

    Columbine was, I think, deliberately scheduled for Hitler’s birthday, which is April 20. Oklahoma City was scheduled for the anniversary of Waco. I think it’s basically coincidence that the anniversary of Waco and Hitler’s birthday are so close together. Who knows what’s up with this one.

    Where are you/she hearing that he was asian if I may ask?

    There was a picture on, I think, the BBC website of the police arresting an Asian guy, but I think they’ve since concluded that there was only one gunman, and he’s dead. They must have made a mistake in arresting that guy. I haven’t seen any info at all about the actual killer, but it’s possible that the student grapevine is getting out ahead of the media.

  32. nausicaa
    April 16, 2007 at 3:56 pm

    “I’ve heard it said that spring brings on manic episodes in bipolar disease.”

    That sounds very odd, like someone confusing SAD and bipolar.

    That would actually make good sense, right? If depression is caused by lack of sunlight; mania could be brought on by increased sunlight. Here’s a link referring to some studies that support that theory: http://www.mhsource.com/expert/exp1111003b.html

  33. April 16, 2007 at 3:57 pm

    Well gee,….thank you deranged, psychotic murderer (who should not have had a loaded gun) for reminding me why I’m misanthropic, cynical about humanity, and live a hermetic lifestyle. Bastard. My heart and thoughts go out to the victims, their family and friends, the students, and everyone in the surrounding community.

  34. DAS
    April 16, 2007 at 4:00 pm

    That sounds very odd, like someone confusing SAD and bipolar. – Mandolin

    Wouldn’t surprise me if there is some degree of connection between the two syndromes …

  35. Mandolin
    April 16, 2007 at 4:07 pm

    “That would actually make good sense, right? If depression is caused by lack of sunlight; mania could be brought on by increased sunlight. Here’s a link referring to some studies that support that theory: http://www.mhsource.com/expert/exp1111003b.html

    Huh. Thanks. That was a really informative threadjack that I started… Sorry.

    I also agree that anxieties + semester schools = boiling over now

    Re: tragedy… no words.

  36. April 16, 2007 at 4:11 pm

    I can’t get over the snow…

    I have the TV on mute – I thought I could watch Jeopardy.

    I’m not going to listen to anything but the Daily Show tonight and read the paper tomorrow.

    The last time the news was on 24/7 on every channel… the space shuttle falling… the Columbia andof course, September 11th.

    Oh, bitch voice (very bitchy, 10+ pain, motrin and a non-working heating pad) sez “30+ die in Iraq every day on average, but their Iraqis, so they’re a blip in the ‘America At War’ section.”

    Bad bitchy voice.

    As for April sucking the suck out of suck, we had freezing temps, and now everyone’s in shorts. I mean, this morning it was cold.

    And my mom is MAJORLY depressed – her job sucks right now and her daughter is incredibly ill (me).

    April 20, 2006, there was a drug bust at my high school. Newsjerk: “A new meaning to “high” school.” Everyone I know: “Hahahahaha, what an asshole.”

    And there’s reports that the police pressured the kids, “I know you have some whatever, sell it to me.”

  37. R. Mildred
    April 16, 2007 at 4:14 pm

    Wouldn’t surprise me if there is some degree of connection between the two syndromes …

    Except most experts think SADS is caused largely by vitamin D deficiencies (which is where the sunlight thing comes in), and Bipolar disorder is a far more complex neurochemical disorder, and isn’t routinely seasonal in nature.

    Could we please stop this even more depressing conversation before it gets stupider?

    Why is hte MSNBC video declaring that someone was arrested? the guy is dead, who’d they arrest?

  38. April 16, 2007 at 4:15 pm

    As for shootings in general – there were seemingly a lot of school shootings my senior year – I wasn’t there more than half the time, but still, my little sister was.

    My school is the most unsafe school in the district – we’re set up like a very, very small college – many buildings, the doors aren’t locked, we just walk right in and out. (I did a couple months ago to get a transcript sent to the U of M.)

    Nothing’s happened – kids have guns on them or in their locker, but no shootings. No deaths on school grounds. (Except for Herkie, but that’s another day – she hung herself in the old gym (the auditorium now) and haunts the old buildings.)

  39. April 16, 2007 at 4:16 pm

    The April thing– remember being a senior in high school around this time? I am right now. I’m not horrible depressed or unstable, and even I feel like snapping.

    Now, if you’re unstable to begin with, this stressful time of year could push you over the edge.

  40. Mat
    April 16, 2007 at 4:16 pm

    Newest reports are up to 33, including the gunman himself.

    http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/16/vtech.shooting/index.html

  41. April 16, 2007 at 4:16 pm

    R Mildred – I agree.

    Who could they arrest? The guy killing everyone killed himself, so we’ll never really know why.

    Maybe somebody helped him?

  42. the15th
    April 16, 2007 at 4:17 pm

    it’s worth noting the theme of misogyny that permeates so many of these shootings.

    There were also the shootings of women at the CNN building and at UW just in the last couple weeks. CNN ran a story about how these incidents raised issues about “workplace safety.” At the time, I thought, what about the issue of the safety of being a woman involved with a man?

  43. prefer not to say
    April 16, 2007 at 4:18 pm

    There’s actually statistical evidence that April is the month with the highest incidences of suicide. (See Kaye Redfield Jameson’s _Night Falls Fast_). Not by much, but still statistically significant.

    The theory is that people who are absolutely paralyzed with depression during the darkest/ coldest days of the year emerge out of an anhedonic state only to experience even more pain. Only, they have enough energy to do damage once things warm up and get lighter.

    Sorry. Back to the regularly scheduled thread topic.

  44. April 16, 2007 at 4:20 pm

    PS: I am not surprised at the girlfriend-targeting part.

  45. BlackBloc
    April 16, 2007 at 4:21 pm

    The news here said he shot up the dorm, then went to the engineering building… My immediate reaction was to think he was looking for someone in particular.

    My other reaction, as a Montrealer, was to think back to Marc Lepine who also shot up the engineering faculty at the Polytechnique. He was after women, because he hated feminists (he had a list of feminists he wanted to shoot but he decided to do the school shooting instead) and engineering was traditionally a guys field.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case here too.

  46. DDay
    April 16, 2007 at 4:27 pm

    I am so pissed right now. The rumor I heard is that the gunman went to GF’s dorm and shot her roommate and RA when she wasn’t there and then went over to the Engineering building to look for her. If this is true, I wonder if the MSM will ever make the connection to domestic violence.

    Hearing all of this right after being told that women should just develop tougher skin in regards to violent and sexualized threats, angers me so much. I wonder how much we are going to hear from the liberal blogosphere that looking into the circumstances surrounding this shooting distracts us from the real issues.

    And even if we do get that discussion, I know I am going to be saddened by the fact that domestic violence only gets attention when it impacts men. It’s not enough when women are threatened/killed/beaten; there has to be collateral damage.

    Maybe I’m making too many conclusions based on very little evidence, but that is my gut feeling right now.

  47. April 16, 2007 at 4:44 pm

    My instant-or not so instant- thought is “KENT STATE!!!!!!! OMG WHAT’S LEFT OF OUR NATIONAL GUARD IS KILLING STUDENT PROTESTORS!!!”

    The “four dead in o-hi-o” playing in my head is not helping.

  48. April 16, 2007 at 4:45 pm

    No, that really was my first assumption.

    I wish I knew why – I don’t know *anything* special about the Kent State shootings.

  49. April 16, 2007 at 5:11 pm

    TWO FUCKING HOURS BETWEEN THE SHOOTINGS?

    And Virginia requires no background check when you buy a gun. How nice.

    BBCWorld is on PBS, it’s better than the local news.

  50. April 16, 2007 at 5:23 pm

    I can’t help to think of the École Polytechnique shooting here in Montréal. Back then it shocked the nation, because it was a vicious act, methodically planned and executed, that gratuitously targeted women. Back then we hoped that something like this would never happen again.

    But people started to forget about the hateful character of this horrible crime, and the pain it caused to the survivors of the massacre, the families and friends of the victims, and to the whole city. People started to relativized Marc Lepine’s motives, and even justify them with all sorts of fucked up reasoning.

    Last September, when the Dawson College shooting happened, a columnist from a prominent newspaper blamed the acts of Kimveer Gill and of Marc Lepine on Québec’s attitude towards ethnicity and language, instead of seeing them as what they really are: non-sensical acts of hateful madmen.

    My heart sank when I heard that the killer in today’s shooting was looking for his girlfriend. As a few of you have already mentioned, the fact that the shooting took place in part at the Engineering department brought back the vivid memories of the Polytechnique events.

    If this information is confirmed, I’m willing to bet anything that people will look over the fact that, once again, it’s male violence against women that really lies at the core of this tragedy.

    In any case, I hope it will reignite the debate, on both sides of the border, on gun control and the need to address the issue of violence as part of the masculine gender identity.

    ***

    On another note, as Blitzgal did, I looked up the Wikipedia article on the Platte Canyon shooting. I was appalled at the fact that, although the author had just mentionned that all the surviving teenaged girls had been sexually assaulted, none of them had been harmed…

  51. Galatea
    April 16, 2007 at 5:37 pm

    Between this and the UW shooting (my friend was in a classroom literally two doors down) I am not really… augh. How absolutely horrible, on so many different levels. Jesus.

  52. Thealogian
    April 16, 2007 at 5:47 pm

    Yeah, his first thing was to affirm the right to bare arms but to only use them “legally.” Whatever, NRA owns both Republicans and 50% of Democrats.

    The Right to Bare Arms? Guess what, you can own a musket. That’s what “arms” were back then–muskets, knifes, axes, etc. We don’t allow private citizens to own non-gun weapons of mass-destruction, yet unlicensed dealers can get you “antique” semi-automatic and automatic weapons through private sale at gun shows (Brady Bill be Damned). There is a huge difference between an automatic assault weapon and a musket.

  53. Keller
    April 16, 2007 at 6:18 pm

    And Virginia requires no background check when you buy a gun. How nice.

    Back ground checks only prevent people who have a felony on their record from purchasing guns. The shooter reportedly used a .22 and a 9mm. 9mm is one of the weakest calibers of pistol cartridge and is at the bottom of the list when considering a “personal defense” load. .22 LR is almost a joke when it comes to shooting anything larger than small rabbits.

    it’s worth noting the theme of misogyny that permeates so many of these shootings.

    ummmm, Few things are as important to people as their relationships with others, be they man/woman, man/man woman/woman. So to say that is insane. the person who committed this heinous act was not acting out of hate or lack of respect for women in general. he was acting out of rage for one person and when he couldn;t find that PERSON, he took it out on whomever he could. Now if it comes out that he specifically targeted women, then you could have a case, but as he went to an engineering building, and was so “successful” with 33 victims, i highly doubt that was the case. (sorry, i just had to be an asshole on that one)

  54. Mnemosyne
    April 16, 2007 at 6:21 pm

    On another note, as Blitzgal did, I looked up the Wikipedia article on the Platte Canyon shooting. I was appalled at the fact that, although the author had just mentionned that all the surviving teenaged girls had been sexually assaulted, none of them had been harmed…

    Well, at least they no longer consider rape to be “the fate worse than death,” right? Kinda-sorta progress. :-p

  55. April 16, 2007 at 6:26 pm

    Keller-

    Marc Lepine told all the men to leave the room before he lined the women up and shot them. He claimed he was doing it to “fight feminism.” Before opening fire on the women, Lepine said, “You’re women, you’re going to be engineers. You’re all a bunch of feminists. I hate feminists.”

    In the Amish shooting, the man sent away all 15 male students. He only kept the female students. He only shot the female students.

    But, yeah, it’s totally not about gender — it’s about relationships to others.

  56. MathInLA
    April 16, 2007 at 6:27 pm

    I’m still freaking out. This could happen to my students. This could _happen to my students_. I mean, I’m at one of the safest schools in LAUSD, and this was a university, not a high school, but… Been freaking out anyway. Managed to project confidence, but that’s a teacher’s job.

    As to the domestic violence– what has been coming out is that, apparently, the first shooting was at 7ish, and the university officials “believed it was a domestic dispute and that the gunman had fled the campus”, and that’s why they didn’t inform anyone for 2 hours– until around the time he walked into a classroom and started killing people.

    And that INFURIATES ME. One more example of how this country’s fucked-up belief that domestic violence is somehow less important or not indicative of a larger problem is _killing people_. It is NOT less dangerous if the guy is shooting his girlfriend– it means that somehow, some way he has the idea that he can _express himself by shooting people_, whether rage or jealousy or whatever. That is a _line people do not usually cross_. It’s like calling acquaintance rape date rape as though it’s somehow less serious. No. Along the way the asshole got the idea that he could deal with whatever was on his mind via force and you get the same horror out of it.

    God. At least they’re mentioning domestic violence at all. Can we -please- get a national conversation about this now? Please?

  57. April 16, 2007 at 6:30 pm

    Oh, and Keller, if these reports are true, the Virginia Tech shooter was looking for his girlfriend, ostensibly to kill her. I’d say that trying to shoot your girlfriend counts as misogyny.

  58. Charlene
    April 16, 2007 at 6:32 pm

    I was studying in a non-traditional field at a training school outside of Montreal on December 6, 1989. In the two weeks between that date and the day the institute closed for Christmas, many of the women (including me) had to put up with harassment by locals who decided that Marc Lepine had been right, but had just gone too far. The harassment included being spat upon, being followed, being screamed at in public, and in one case even an attempted rape.

    I’m wondering right now how many trolls are going to decide that this was the fault of the “crazy bitch”.

  59. Keller
    April 16, 2007 at 6:42 pm

    i wasn;t referring to the other cases in which it was there expressed intent to hurt women, i was referring to THIS case.

    Oh, and Keller, if these reports are true, the Virginia Tech shooter was looking for his girlfriend, ostensibly to kill her. I’d say that trying to shoot your girlfriend counts as misogyny.

    misogyny – hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women.

    But he wasn;t trying to kill her because of her sex, he was trying to kill her because he was pissed at the person who happened to be a woman. What would you say if he were gay and trying to kill his boyfriend (which is analogous)?

  60. Allison
    April 16, 2007 at 6:44 pm

    The rumor I heard is that the gunman went to GF’s dorm and shot her roommate and RA

    Oh, hell. I was an RA for three years in college. Now I can’t stop imagining what that would have been like – hearing yelling, going out into the hall to do your job like always, and –

    Shit. God. Sorry, I’ll stop.

  61. human
    April 16, 2007 at 6:44 pm

    I just can’t believe they didn’t bother to notify anyone for 2-3 hours. Or, well, I can, but it pisses me the hell off. I guess they figured since it was just a “domestic dispute” he couldn’t possibly have meant to harm anyone important.

  62. April 16, 2007 at 7:12 pm

    We don’t yet have a clear picture of what happened up at VT (or down at VT depending on your location) – but like many others here, I am surprised to hear that campus was not shut down after the initial shooting.

    I know that Duke would immediately be shut down if something like this had happened here this morning… Although Duke IS a smaller school…

  63. Mnemosyne
    April 16, 2007 at 7:14 pm

    Here’s the actual quote from the AP story that’s up on Yahoo! News right now:

    Steger defended the university’s handling of the tragedy, saying authorities believed that the shooting at the dorm was a domestic dispute and mistakenly thought the gunman had fled the campus.

    “We had no reason to suspect any other incident was going to occur,” he said.

    So, yes, the administration decided that it was “only” a domestic violence situation and that someone capable of shooting his girlfriend in cold blood couldn’t possibly be capable of any additional violence.

    Nice calculation there, Mr. Steger. By deciding that a guy who would break into a dorm room to shoot his girlfriend and her RA wasn’t a threat to the rest of the community, you helped kill 30 other people. Good job.

  64. Shankar Gupta
    April 16, 2007 at 7:16 pm

    V-Tech’s about 45 minutes away from my parent’s place, I used to go there all the time when I was in high school. Scary.

    Re: Keller

    The Right to Bare Arms? Guess what, you can own a musket. That’s what “arms” were back then–muskets, knifes, axes, etc.

    I think I’ve heard this exact argument in a stand-up comedian’s routine. That aside, it’s sort of short-sighted for any progressive (and anyone, really) to insist that our constitutional rights apply only to the technologies available at the time.

  65. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 7:17 pm

    I dint read every entry, but misogyny? Come on
    Shoot your girlfriend in the head isn’t hatred of women, it is insanity. I would volunteer to cane him before I get to execute him?

  66. April 16, 2007 at 7:25 pm

    On a CNN tv report earlier on this evening, the EIC of the Virginia Tech student paper told the press that the students had first been told that two people had been wounded/killed in the dorms early this morning, and apparently presented it as a “domestic dispute”.

    A “domestic dispute”, to me, is two people arguing. When you end up with two bodies, when it involves violence, weapons and death, I call it cold-blooded murder.

  67. the15th
    April 16, 2007 at 7:28 pm

    The Daily Mail is calling it a “lovers’ tiff”. But, you know, they’re the only news source that’s even prominently mentioning that the violence was aimed at his girlfriend. It’s like intimate violence against women is sordid tabloid trash unfit for serious news outlets to mention.

  68. Regina
    April 16, 2007 at 7:45 pm

    the 15th: Maybe it’s because they can’t tell the difference between violence and Teh Sex, which is oh-so-titillating. Urg.

  69. Regina
    April 16, 2007 at 7:47 pm

    Seroiusly? A “lovers’ tiff”??? Could they be more dismissive, or inaccurate? Nobody ends up dead when they have a “tiff”.

  70. April 16, 2007 at 7:47 pm

    There’s a subtle idea attached to that—-that woman should have absorbed that man’s violence and therefore spared the rest of the population.

  71. the15th
    April 16, 2007 at 7:57 pm

    Here’s a link to the story. It’s a totally appalling headline, but I’m not sure whether it’s worse than the news sources that simply minimize the fact that these cases are intimate partner violence.

  72. April 16, 2007 at 8:05 pm

    The Queen has weighed in.

    Apparently she was not amused, but indeed was “shocked”

  73. Regina
    April 16, 2007 at 8:06 pm

    At this point, either the Daily Mail has a lot of information that the AP isn’t reporting, or they’re being a bit sensationalist/irresponsible. AP reports are leaving a lot of things vague that the Daily Mail is speculating about, so I have no idea how “speculative” the Mail’s account is.

    That headline is wretched by any metric, though.

  74. Keller
    April 16, 2007 at 8:07 pm

    Re: Keller

    The Right to Bare Arms? Guess what, you can own a musket. That’s what “arms” were back then–muskets, knifes, axes, etc.

    I think I’ve heard this exact argument in a stand-up comedian’s routine. That aside, it’s sort of short-sighted for any progressive (and anyone, really) to insist that our constitutional rights apply only to the technologies available at the time.

    Woah woah woah, i never said that, that was someone else responding to me. What i think is going to be very interesting is what this does to the new assault weapons ban that is currently in committee.

    So, yes, the administration decided that it was “only” a domestic violence situation and that someone capable of shooting his girlfriend in cold blood couldn’t possibly be capable of any additional violence.

    Nice calculation there, Mr. Steger. By deciding that a guy who would break into a dorm room to shoot his girlfriend and her RA wasn’t a threat to the rest of the community, you helped kill 30 other people. Good job.

    What indication had they had previously that this individual was planning on doing anything similar to the tragedy that eventually transpired? this was not about what he was capable of doing this was a decision based on what was probable. Hindsite is 20/20 but this is a severe knee jerk reaction. Next time someone is killed in a domestic dispute in NYC or Chicago or Las Angeles they should, by your logic, immediately shut down the city, just in case… …

  75. BarbaraD
    April 16, 2007 at 8:14 pm

    Can someone please explain to Keller that the widespread belief men seem to have that it’s ok to shoot your partner or ex-partner if you’re mad at them = misogyny.

  76. Seriously
    April 16, 2007 at 8:19 pm

    Wow. This is just horrific.

    “I guess they figured since it was just a “domestic dispute” he couldn’t possibly have meant to harm anyone important.”

    Human, totally, I’m with you on that. The shooting at the UW (just a couple of weeks ago) happened the next building over from mine. We were completely unaware that anything happened. I didn’t hear about it until my lunchbreak, and only because I was checking the daily news on the internet. No one heard about it on campus except from outside news sources. In response to this the authorities were assuring everyone that in such “domestic” cases no one else would be at risk but the victim. So you know, no big deal.

    There was a New York Post headline today about a woman gunned by her ex-boyfriend, “Crime of Passion.” I don’t even know what to say about that.

  77. April 16, 2007 at 8:24 pm

    Perhaps it’s time to tune out rumors and the tabloid media.

  78. April 16, 2007 at 8:25 pm

    God damn this is horrible.

    Meanwhile, an ACTUAL domestic dispute is taking place right outside the door to my apartment. The man keeps calling the woman a fucking whore. This is too much hate for me to process in one single day.

  79. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 8:26 pm

    Is it ok to say that War is not murder as someone opined earlier?

  80. MN
    April 16, 2007 at 8:27 pm

    Nah, this really doesn’t happen too often. There are a lot of reasons to protect the right to bear arms. For instance, what are you going to do if someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night? Even if you called 911 immediately, the cops aren’t going to arrive until this person(s) has had the chance to really mutilate and rape the hell out of you. In the 10 minutes or so (if we’re assuming they’re fast) it takes the police to get there, this guy could have already killed you.

    Also, even if we did place a ban on guns, good luck enforcing it. We can’t even keep actual live humans from crossing our borders in droves, what makes you think we can keep guns from crossing the border? The law would mostly just affect people who care about obeying laws.

    Also, the gun doesn’t have to be under your pillow, just in a place where it’s readily accessible.

    Finally, in the scenario you posed, if someone else had had an accessible gun, they could have taken this creep out early.
    — ————————
    Sally Says:
    April 16th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
    I notice Dubya prefaced his remarks about the shooting by playing to his base with an affirmation of the right to keep and bear arms.

    You must be fucking kidding me. The guy shot up a dorm full of kids at 7:15 in the morning. What does Bush think is supposed to happen? College students should sleep with rifles under their pillows? There is no way in hell to make this anything but an argument against the ready availability of guns.

    The Times is now reporting 31 people dead. It sounds like probably most of them were students.

  81. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 8:29 pm

    Is it ok to say how sad this is, Tomorrow is promised to no one. If you love someone, tell them every chance you get.

  82. Kim
    April 16, 2007 at 8:39 pm

    Just pray for the families. Forget politics.

    This is the start of a long nightmare for each mother, father, partner.

    Straight home, each of you souls.

  83. April 16, 2007 at 8:47 pm

    Word, Norbizness. In times like these, it’s best to tune out the tabloid media. If you normally find them off-base and annoying, then today, their headlines will make you weep with shame.

  84. Tony
    April 16, 2007 at 8:48 pm

    Can this at least be an a-political tragedy for one day? Just one?

    Gun rights and feminism, and we haven’t even buried the bodies yet.

    Good Grief.

  85. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 8:52 pm

    Pres. Bush started that.

  86. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 8:53 pm

    And he has a point.

  87. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 8:53 pm

    I mean tony

  88. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 8:59 pm

    In the days to come we will discuss security and what we could have done. I would like to see a blog here about the FACT that evil people are gonna do what they are gonna do and sometimes it is out of our hands. I pray for the families, I was glad to see so many people talking to God and Christ and hope that you continue.

  89. April 16, 2007 at 9:04 pm

    WAIT A MINUTE!!! MN in the pregnancy thread was a fake rad-fem troll wondering why we were talking about straight-girl issues like abortion. (I know, right?) Now, s/he is here as a proud defender of the 2d amendment. Brava/o, sister/brother!

  90. April 16, 2007 at 9:13 pm

    Seriously. Can somebody ban MN already?

  91. April 16, 2007 at 9:24 pm

    Can this at least be an a-political tragedy for one day? Just one?

    Gun rights and feminism, and we haven’t even buried the bodies yet.

    Good Grief.

    How is pointing out that a lot of these crimes purposely target women “politicizing” it? I’ll also point out that they’re mostly perpetuated by men. That isn’t to say “blame sexism,” or that feminism would have saved the day, it’s just an observation. And given that this is a feminist blog and not CNN, a pertinent one.

  92. Mandolin
    April 16, 2007 at 9:24 pm

    “Is it ok to say that War is not murder as someone opined earlier?”

    No.

  93. Hector B.
    April 16, 2007 at 9:27 pm

    Virginia does require a background check prior to purchasing any firearm, with up to a ten day waiting period. Also, the buyer must wait a month before buying another handgun. Possession is prohibited to any person convicted of a felony, or any
    person under 29 with a juvenile adjudication, as a 14-yearold
    or older, which would be a felony if committed by
    an adult, or a person acquitted by reason of insanity and
    committed to a mental institution, or anyone adjudicated legally
    incompetent or mentally incapacitated or involuntarily
    committed.
    Psychopaths and sociopaths regularly target women — the one who grew up down the street from me stabbed a 15 yo girl to death when he was 18. She was on her way home from school. He was then committed to a mental institution. When he was later determined to be sane, he was released. He then stabbed a women in her early 20s using a knife from her kitchen drawer.

  94. April 16, 2007 at 9:28 pm

    Finally, in the scenario you posed, if someone else had had an accessible gun, they could have taken this creep out early.

    Umm… no they wouldn’t have. The last thing that would have made this situation better is two armed nutters exchanging fire in a dorm.

    But because the majority of the murders occured in the second set of shootings , it’s highly likely that if the college had sent out a warning immediately after the first two murders at the dorm, many people who are dead would be alive now who are not.

    For instance, what are you going to do if someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night?

    Kick them in the throat?

    However, if the people who break into your house in the middle of the night happen to be policemen, having a gun handy is just a real good way to be killed and/or arrested for trying to shoot a policeman.

    And your scary scenarios all involve stranger rapists, or stranger murderers anyway, and so are kinda useless.

    This man went looking for a particular person, he probably knew most of hte people he killed, and was probably no stranger on campus either and didn’t illegally enter anywhere.

    So when you say “oh but what if a stranger breaks into a place he’s not welcome?” or “oh but what if a stranger has diabolical intentions towards you?” – most of which I assume are designed to add a further layer of intimidation on top of hte preexisting one this shooting is clearly giving some people, because you’re a troll and trolls are all about trying to emotionally manipulate other people so they can have a sense of control within their sad little lives (hence the guns thing also I’d guess) – you’re being off topic as all hell, because that’s nothing like the situation that acutally occurred.

    At least the anti-gun peeps are sort of on topic if you squint and turn your head just so – htey also have the fun and games of being right about the 2nd amendment being hogswash, but they manage to get there from the wrong direction (hint: the 2nd amendment specifies when and under what conditions one is allowed to bear arms, for some ineffible reason the NRA truncates the amendment before it gets to that bit).

  95. April 16, 2007 at 9:28 pm

    Oh, please, Tony. Already we have in the NYTimes the VT people saying that they didn’t bother to inform anyone of the first round of shootings — even though there were two dead bodies and the shooter was still at large — because it was only a “domestic disturbance.” It is, always already, a political issue.

  96. RKMK
    April 16, 2007 at 9:30 pm

    Seriously. Can somebody ban MN already?

    And, seriously, Greg and his creepy split-personality are giving me the wiggins.

  97. April 16, 2007 at 9:30 pm

    What indication had they had previously that this individual was planning on doing anything similar to the tragedy that eventually transpired?

    You mean other than all of the times it’s happened?

    Why, no reason at all.

  98. Henry
    April 16, 2007 at 9:34 pm

    I’ll certainly agree that hatred of women plays a large part in most of these shootings, but I don’t think that’s evidence of patriarchy. It makes sense: If you’re a guy, and you suck at life (as most of these jerkoffs do), it follows that most women, and most men also, will not like you much. Men not liking you isn’t really a big deal, but women not liking you is. Nothing reinforces someone’s sense of victimization and mistreatment as being unsuccessful with and unliked by the opposite sex. So because they’re pathetic, cowardly losers, they vent their rage on the people who remind them of it every day. It’s a shame.

  99. ACS
    April 16, 2007 at 9:38 pm

    To be fair, the first shooting had a clearly defined motive, and it appeared to not be a spree killing. The vast majority of murders where a motive can be assigned in the first few hours of investigation don’t turn into spree killings.

    Shutting down a university is like suspending the activities of an entire small town — something that certainly wouldn’t be expected in the case of a sudden unsolved murder. Virginia Tech has twenty-eight thousand students: evacuating the entire campus would be extremely difficult.

    If you shut down classes, people return to the dorms, and the first shooting was actually in the dorms. Rather than cobble together an emergency plan based on the arbitrary expectation that people would be safer in the place where a murder just occurred than in a place where no murders were occurring, the police did what they could with the information that they were given. It just turns out they were wrong.

    — ACS

  100. Mandolin
    April 16, 2007 at 9:39 pm

    ” So because they’re pathetic, cowardly losers, they vent their rage on the people who remind them of it every day. It’s a shame. ”

    But women, sometimes, are also losers.

    And yet, as a rule, we don’t feel entitled to shoot lots of people. Why is it overwhelmingly men who kill their domestic partners, and who are serial killers?

    “Nothing reinforces someone’s sense of victimization and mistreatment as being unsuccessful with and unliked by the opposite sex.”

    So, where are all the ugly women going into classrooms, asking the girls to leave, and shooting all the boys?

  101. April 16, 2007 at 9:42 pm

    oudemia said:

    Already we have in the NYTimes the VT people saying that they didn’t bother to inform anyone of the first round of shootings — even though there were two dead bodies and the shooter was still at large — because it was only a “domestic disturbance.” It is, always already, a political issue.

    I’m inclined to agree, as I sit at the shelter, asking women on the respondent information sheet for their OFPs, “Does your abuser own or have access to firearms?”

  102. lucizoe
    April 16, 2007 at 9:43 pm

    Henry, there doesn’t have to be “evidence of patriarchy” in this specific case. Patriarchy ain’t exactly up for debate. It exists and we live in it.

  103. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 9:43 pm

    Women are mass murders very often.It just doesn’t work that way. Let me suggest that it is a matter of maternal instincts in most women and a lack of it in men.

  104. Henry
    April 16, 2007 at 9:44 pm

    And yet, as a rule, we don’t feel entitled to shoot lots of people. Why is it overwhelmingly men who kill their domestic partners, and who are serial killers?

    Because men are more likely to be aggressive by nature than women, obviously. Is that even in dispute? I’m not ashamed of it, it’s just the truth as I understand it. Sometimes it’s a good thing, sometimes not. Perhaps women are more likely to turn their anger inward as opposed to outward, I don’t know.

  105. April 16, 2007 at 9:46 pm

    Because men are more likely to be aggressive by nature than women, obviously. Is that even in dispute?

    Yes.

  106. Henry
    April 16, 2007 at 9:49 pm

    Yes.

    In that case, my apologies. Certainly not attempting to start a new debate.

  107. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 9:49 pm

    Who is disputing. The fact play out the truth. How many women are i prison for aggressive violence as opposed to men?

  108. April 16, 2007 at 9:50 pm

    fox news via chicago sun times just said that the shooter was a chinese man here on an f-1 visa

    also, the police are treating the girlfriend shooting separately

    the links are on my website

  109. False Flag Operative
    April 16, 2007 at 9:51 pm

    A bill that would have permitted college students to bear handguns was defeated.

    This shouldn’t be a surprise because of tragedies such as the VT shootings. I support the 2nd Amendment, but we have to be realistic here.

    Nah, this really doesn’t happen too often. There are a lot of reasons to protect the right to bear arms.

    MN, even if the college students were armed to the teeth, a maniac with two 9 mm handguns fully loaded would not have let them defend themselves. Besides, the average college student isn’t trained to kill and the maniac would have just shot the student before s/he could even reach for his/her gun.

    Expect a new assault weapons ban and stricter gun control. :(

  110. April 16, 2007 at 9:51 pm

    Who is disputing. The fact play out the truth. How many women are i prison for aggressive violence as opposed to men?

    And more black men are in prison than white men. If the fact plays out the truth, is the “truth” that black men are “naturally” more aggressive?

    The race analogy isn’t perfect, but keep in mind that when it comes to gender, socialization is pretty powerful.

  111. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 9:54 pm

    I don’t really care what nationality he is.
    I love Fox, but they really ticked my off. They are talking about Why this happened. Does that really matter. There is no reason for it, the guy was a nut, an evil hater of life and in probably in Hell where he deserves to be.

  112. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 9:59 pm

    Good point Jill. I wouldn’t say they are more aggressive, I do think there is a culture of violence that has a huge impact of their behavior. I guess that socialization would be my explanation. But I am a white man and that is probably a very naive view.

    As for the gender issue, it is powerful as well. What is the solution.

  113. MN
    April 16, 2007 at 9:59 pm

    You make a lot of assumptions here you simply cannot support. How come armed students couldn’t have defended themselves? Because you said so?

    You said:

    “MN, even if the college students were armed to the teeth, a maniac with two 9 mm handguns fully loaded would not have let them defend themselves. Besides, the average college student isn’t trained to kill and the maniac would have just shot the student before s/he could even reach for his/her gun.”

  114. False Flag Operative
    April 16, 2007 at 10:03 pm

    You make a lot of assumptions here you simply cannot support. How come armed students couldn’t have defended themselves? Because you said so?

    Simple, it takes more time for a student to pull out his or her handgun than it would for a maniac to kill him/her. A gunman is not going to let a student defend himself or herself you know. You have to be realistic here.

  115. RobW
    April 16, 2007 at 10:04 pm

    9mm is one of the weakest calibers of pistol cartridge and is at the bottom of the list when considering a “personal defense” load.

    Right. That explains why it’s the most popular pistol caliber in the world.

    Anyone want to buy mine? I don’t think I want it anymore.so th

    Small calibers kill easily at close range. This guy had a 9mm and a .22 and managed to kill 32 people with them. Yep, those teeny pistols are practically harmless. If you really think that, I hope you never own any. Do you treat weapons with greater care if they have a larger bullet? If so, you’re an idiot.

    The Right to Bare Arms? Guess what, you can own a musket. That’s what “arms” were back then

    Right. Muskets were state-of-the-art weapons, the highest technology small arm available to anyone, even governments. By that logic, we ought to be able to buy M-16s with 30rd mags and grenade launchers.

    Next time someone is killed in a domestic dispute in NYC or Chicago or Las Angeles they should, by your logic, immediately shut down the city.

    If a couple are in a loud argument and their neighbors call the cops, that’s a domestic dispute. If a credible threat of violence is made, that’s assault. If someone gets hit, that’s battery. Hit with a weapon, aggravated battery. Killed, that’s a homicide.

    Dozens killed? Various words describe it- “domestic dispute” isn’t one of them.

    A single person killed in a major city is, of course, directly equivalent to a massacre on a small-town college campus.

    Think: at least 2 dead and several wounded in the dormitory. They believe, at that point, that the killer was gunning for his girlfriend. They don’t have him in custody, nor is she around. So, after the first shooting, they have the perp on the loose and the intended victim (so they believed) isn’t around. That kind of hints at the possibility of more violence to come, doncha think? Apparently the admin at VT didn’t think. Or maybe they figured he’d shoot her off campus, therefore it’s not their problem.

    Per CNN.com: “‘We concluded first that the incident in Ambler Johnston [dormitory] was domestic in nature. In fact we had some reason to think the shooter had left campus,’ Virginia Tech President Charles Steger said.”

    Well, they had some reason, so it’s all good.

  116. MN
    April 16, 2007 at 10:06 pm

    Yah, criteria for banning is whether or not you like someone. I’m sure Jill will get right on it.

    Jenny Dreadful Says:
    April 16th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
    Seriously. Can somebody ban MN already?

  117. RobW
    April 16, 2007 at 10:07 pm

    Oh, and I really love the “arm the students” meme. And as the SWAT team comes in, who are they supposed to shoot? Everyone they see with a gun, right? For that matter, how are the armed students supposed to know who to shoot? Great idea: have one maniac pull out a gun and shoot, then everybody in sight starts shooting at each other.

  118. MN
    April 16, 2007 at 10:09 pm

    You’re the one who’s not being realistic, saying that not one of them could have shot back at him. You’re assuming something really unlikely just to support your political agenda. You really shouldn’t be using other peoples’ tragedies to advance it. It seems really callous.

    False Flag Operative Says:
    April 16th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
    You make a lot of assumptions here you simply cannot support. How come armed students couldn’t have defended themselves? Because you said so?

    Simple, it takes more time for a student to pull out his or her handgun than it would for a maniac to kill him/her. A gunman is not going to let a student defend himself or herself you know. You have to be realistic here.

  119. Henry
    April 16, 2007 at 10:12 pm

    Oh, and I really love the “arm the students” meme. And as the SWAT team comes in, who are they supposed to shoot? Everyone they see with a gun, right? For that matter, how are the armed students supposed to know who to shoot? Great idea: have one maniac pull out a gun and shoot, then everybody in sight starts shooting at each other.

    Well, armed students wouldn’t have prevented this shooting, but there’s plenty of evidence that it might have limited the number of deaths. You can find that happening all the way back to Charles Whitman.

  120. MN
    April 16, 2007 at 10:12 pm

    One last comment before I’m out of here for the night. I’m not necessarily saying all the students should have been armed. What I’m saying is that a gun ban is not the solution. People could still get them illegally, meaning the people who will have them will be those who don’t care about breaking the law (like someone who wants to kill 30 or so classmates and then himself). Va Tech was a “gun free zone,” after all.

    At the same time, you deny people who care about obeying the law a means for defending themselves. A gun ban is not going to solve your problems. Good night.

  121. False Flag Operative
    April 16, 2007 at 10:13 pm

    You’re the one who’s not being realistic, saying that not one of them could have shot back at him. You’re assuming something really unlikely just to support your political agenda. You really shouldn’t be using other peoples’ tragedies to advance it. It seems really callous.

    False Flag Operative Says:
    April 16th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
    You make a lot of assumptions here you simply cannot support. How come armed students couldn’t have defended themselves? Because you said so?

    Simple, it takes more time for a student to pull out his or her handgun than it would for a maniac to kill him/her. A gunman is not going to let a student defend himself or herself you know. You have to be realistic here.

    I support the right to bear arms too. If the students were better prepared, then maybe they could have stopped the gunman. That is still easier said than done. It took the police 2 hours to get there in the first place.

  122. MN
    April 16, 2007 at 10:14 pm

    Okay, really the last comment, I can’t resist. You all notice that the girl at the top of the screen is wielding a gun. I think this suggests that women can empower themselves by becoming proficient in arms use and carrying guns. Thoughts?

  123. False Flag Operative
    April 16, 2007 at 10:15 pm

    One last comment before I’m out of here for the night. I’m not necessarily saying all the students should have been armed. What I’m saying is that a gun ban is not the solution. People could still get them illegally, meaning the people who will have them will be those who don’t care about breaking the law (like someone who wants to kill 30 or so classmates and then himself). Va Tech was a “gun free zone,” after all.

    At the same time, you deny people who care about obeying the law a means for defending themselves. A gun ban is not going to solve your problems. Good night.

    Well, why would we ban guns? That would be even worse! It is just that the students can not defend themselves all the time. You can’t assume that a maniac with a 9 mm is going to give you a chance to fight back.

  124. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 10:16 pm

    So true. I walked into a gun show and walked out with a 9mm.myself. People will get guns if they want them. Which reiterates my earlier point. Don’t blame the gun, the gun laws or anything else, The guy was a lunatic and that is the explanation.

  125. April 16, 2007 at 10:18 pm

    You know, this is the first time comments on this blog have left me cringing. I’ve seen a lot of comments that link it to a girlfriend that he was there to kill. The fact is, noone knows why he was there beyond “to shoot people.” According to most reports he was asian and not one of the dead were asian. Using the “jump to conclusion” method some here are being so quick to use? We could argue that this was a hate crime against non-asian people. Do I believe that? NO. But I have no evidence he was there to kill a girlfriend either, in fact, nobody knows anything about his motives at this time. Could we leave the speculation of him being a psycho killing mysoginist off the table until there is something to actually support it?

    It’s a tragedy. And that’s all we know right now. The assumption I am seeing here are not any better than the “blame video games crowd”.

    Sorry…but this rampant “speculation with nothing to back me up” that goes on rubs me the wrong way…especially because we will get plenty of that from CNN, MSNBC and Fox. Do I have to see it when I come here as well?

  126. NewCompu
    April 16, 2007 at 10:19 pm

    On a CNN tv report earlier on this evening, the EIC of the Virginia Tech student paper told the press that the students had first been told that two people had been wounded/killed in the dorms early this morning, and apparently presented it as a “domestic dispute”.

    Yeah, the VT president couldn’t have made it any more xplicit, when asked when they didn’t do anything to secure the campus after the first shooting, he replied that they regarded it as a domestic dispute. So you know, no worries if you’ve got an armed murderer prowling your campus, you know how these domestic tiffs are, clearly there’s no danger to anyone else, no issues involved becides boyfriend/girlfriend stuff.

    Nothing reinforces someone’s sense of victimization and mistreatment as being unsuccessful with and unliked by the opposite sex.

    And yet I’m guessing there are many, many women who are unsuccessful and unliked by the opposite sex. They committing a lot of massacres these days? Maybe they don’t tend to feel as entitled to the same degree of societal deference as the guys do, or something?

    9mm is one of the weakest calibers of pistol cartridge and is at the bottom of the list when considering a “personal defense” load. .22 LR is almost a joke when it comes to shooting anything larger than small rabbits.

    Gosh, and hemanaged to slaughter 32 with these wimpy ass girly weapons? Amazing. Just goes to show we need sat least emis to have any hope to prevail against the cottontail set.

  127. zuzu
    April 16, 2007 at 10:21 pm

    MN, learning basic coding will greatly improve the readability of your posts. We have the tags there for a reason.

    Well, armed students wouldn’t have prevented this shooting, but there’s plenty of evidence that it might have limited the number of deaths.

    You know, alerting the other students that there was a maniac running loose with a gun might have done a thing or two as well. Just a thought.

    For all those who think that shutting down campus is just impossible: they did it before when an escaped inmate was loose near the campus. And the NYPD regularly shuts down portions of the subway system — affecting nearly as many people as on that campus — to do investigations. It’s a not-unheard-of public safety measure. And, you know, alerting students to the presence of a gunman might have resulted in people spotting him.

  128. False Flag Operative
    April 16, 2007 at 10:21 pm

    People will get guns if they want them. Which reiterates my earlier point. Don’t blame the gun, the gun laws or anything else, The guy was a lunatic and that is the explanation.

    Guns don’t kill people, lunatics with the guns kill people. :P

  129. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 10:25 pm

    Cringe is powerful word. I cringe when I see 32 college kids killed. But someone using tragedy to advance an agenda is not really a suprise on this site.

  130. Anatolia
    April 16, 2007 at 10:25 pm

    RobW Says:
    April 16th, 2007 at 10:07 pm
    Oh, and I really love the “arm the students” meme. And as the SWAT team comes in, who are they supposed to shoot? Everyone they see with a gun, right? For that matter, how are the armed students supposed to know who to shoot? Great idea: have one maniac pull out a gun and shoot, then everybody in sight starts shooting at each other.

    Naw, man. They’re all John McClane-types with bulging muscles glistening with sweat and a half naked, terrified woman on their arm, except for the bad guy with a jagged purple scar over his left eye, a badly done tattoo, and something pus filled on his right cheek. Everyone would know the good guys from the bad. They’re the ones who are going to Save the Day(c). It’s a Scientific Fact(TM).

  131. RobW
    April 16, 2007 at 10:26 pm

    You all notice that the girl at the top of the screen is wielding a gun. I think this suggests that women can empower themselves by becoming proficient in arms use and carrying guns. Thoughts?

    Finally, an interesting point.

    If this does turn out to be yet another anti-woman massacre, I’ll be willing to institute a ban on MALE gun ownership. Including my own.

  132. Henry
    April 16, 2007 at 10:27 pm

    or something?

    Yup, I’m going with that.

  133. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 10:28 pm

    So do lunatics with box cutters, and bombs in their jackets, and fertilizer and any other devise they can manage to get their sick twisted hands on. IT WAS NOT THE GUN

  134. April 16, 2007 at 10:31 pm

    I’ve seen a lot of comments that link it to a girlfriend that he was there to kill. The fact is, noone knows why he was there beyond “to shoot people.”

    So you think that he shot two people dead in the morning at his girlfriend’s dorm and then went off on a totally unrelated murderous spree two hours later for no reason at all?

    Geez, I hope they don’t put you on the jury. Or any jury.

  135. April 16, 2007 at 10:33 pm

    Greg wrote, “Does that really matter. There is no reason for it, the guy was a nut, an evil hater of life and in probably in Hell where he deserves to be.”

    YES, it matters why it happened. It matters that relationships between men and women, and the way that domestic and intimate partner violence is reported in the mainsteam media, is constructed within the patriarchy. It’s awfully easy to dismiss the shooter as “just a lunatic” or an evil hater of life who’s now in Hell; it’s harder, but ultimately necessary, to analyze the systems and discourses of power and domination behind acts like this.

    I mean, I agree that he’s in Hell. But as Jill said, this was political from the beginning. The patriarchy has made it so.

  136. Doc
    April 16, 2007 at 10:37 pm

    So do lunatics with box cutters, and bombs in their jackets, and fertilizer and any other devise they can manage to get their sick twisted hands on. IT WAS NOT THE GUN

    I’ve been telling the TSA that for years. They just won’t listen.

  137. Christina
    April 16, 2007 at 10:41 pm

    I’m glad biosparite (comment #5) picked up on this too:

    “A White House spokesman said President Bush was horrified by the rampage and offered his prayers to the victims and the people of Virginia. ‘The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed,’ spokeswoman Dana Perino said.”

    http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1610857-3,00.html

    I can’t believe (actually, sadly, I can) that people die in this shooting and Bush & Co.’s impulse is to take a pause in order not to offend rabid second-amendment fans. Not to mention the implication that the big problem here is that laws were broken.

    Outrageous.

  138. randomliberal
    April 16, 2007 at 10:41 pm

    Henry sez:

    Well, armed students wouldn’t have prevented this shooting, but there’s plenty of evidence that it might have limited the number of deaths. You can find that happening all the way back to Charles Whitman.

    Erm…Whitman was shot by two regular police officers who stormed the clock tower, according to the Wikipedia article.

  139. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 10:42 pm

    Jessica, Jessica, Jessica

    First, if this guy was Asian then it was not caused by American politics.

    Second, my point was refering to today. We have time to discuss how this was some mainstream media distortion, which by the way is run by you libs.

  140. April 16, 2007 at 10:43 pm

    First, if this guy was Asian then it was not caused by American politics.

    Being Asian and being American are mutually exclusive now?

  141. zuzu
    April 16, 2007 at 10:46 pm

    First, if this guy was Asian then it was not caused by American politics.

    Lord, you’re dense.

    you libs.

    What’s a lib?

  142. Rhiannon
    April 16, 2007 at 10:46 pm

    “They are talking about Why this happened. Does that really matter. There is no reason for it, the guy was a nut, an evil hater of life and in probably in Hell where he deserves to be.”

    Tsk. Classic Coping Mechanism. Denial, Disassociation. You are afraid of the truth, you don’t want to know.
    The truth: That this guy was not some “dark villian with a curly mustache” but a male with an inflated sense of entitlement and a couple of guns – who thought the correct way to vent his aggressions was to kill a bunch of people and then himself.

    The truth is that this “aggression” is a taught, learned & generally accepted behaviour, much like the undercurrent of wariness most women have of men (cept most men get pissed off when you treat them as a potential threat – so not really the accepted part). It is learned, therefore it can be unlearned/coped with or rehabilitated if you prefer. But if we ignore the problem, it will all go away right? If we leave it alone and don’t dig for the roots, the weed will just die on it’s own, right? Cause it’s our probing of the subject that’s keeping it alive [not the society (aka rain and sunshine) that inculturates an ideology of violence in males, right?]

    If this “aggression” is something that men are “naturally”, then what hope is there for humanity?

  143. Allison
    April 16, 2007 at 10:48 pm

    Being Asian and being American are mutually exclusive now?

    THANK you.

    Also, it’s nice to know the patriarchy is solely an American construct! You learn something untrue every day, I guess.

  144. April 16, 2007 at 10:48 pm

    First, if this guy was Asian then it was not caused by American politics.

    Fess up: you compliment Chinese-Americans on how well they speak English, don’t you.

  145. Hector B.
    April 16, 2007 at 10:48 pm

    On a blog called Feministe, it shouldn’t be me who points out that women are perfectly capable of armed self-defense. Here the killer was not some combat-trained superhero, but just an average jamoke. And unless he sneaked up behind her and put two bullets in her, she would have had some opportunity to save her life.

    Not that it would have been easy to keep a self-defense weapon secured yet within reach at all times, especially in the communal living environment of a dorm. But I would bet that she had some inkling that this man she knew might do her harm, and she could have prepared for this situation.

    For any woman who believes that she could kill to save her own life, for any woman who is disciplined enough to practice shooting and to keep her weapon secure at all times, for any woman who believes her will is strong enough that she would not passively give up her weapon and submit to being killed or raped, I recommend the NRA’s Refuse to Be a Victim training classes. For women who are shorter, smaller, and less muscular than the average man, firearms are the one equalizer.

    And remember, by the time the police show up, about all they can do is take statements and string the “police line — do not cross” tape.

  146. twf
    April 16, 2007 at 10:52 pm

    But I would bet that she had some inkling that this man she knew might do her harm, and she could have prepared for this situation.

    Hector, I’m sure you didn’t mean to insinuate anything, but this treads awfully close to blaming the woman for her boyfriend’s behaviour. Contrary to myth, we don’t all have “women’s intuition” to separate the psychos from the good guys.

  147. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 10:54 pm

    Who do you hang out with? I know absolutely no one like this. I may be from the south, but this mentality does not exist in normal people. Only the nuts who have been raised like that. So what if you are right and this is some cultural aggression that us men folk are taught, what now?

    LIberal, was I wrong.

    Jill, I don’t get what you are saying. I will admit it and not be ashamed. My momma said their were no stupid questions. I never did believe that. What do you mean?

  148. April 16, 2007 at 10:56 pm

    To be fair, the first shooting had a clearly defined motive, and it appeared to not be a spree killing.

    TWO PEOPLE HAD JUST BEEN MURDERED! I want ot know what sort of logic is employed that leads to college administrators going “oh so another two snuffed it in a violent shooting, ho hum…” But of course there’s always that little “domestic violence” moderator thye add in, like that explains it all!

    “Oh, some students were just gunned down in the dorms.”

    “WHAT!? We should do something shouldn’t we?”

    “huh? Oh, no, it was just some domestic violence thing, you know.”

    “Oh right, fyu! I thought it was serious or something.”

    “We’ll probably have to cancel the cleaner’s leave though.”

    “Oh dammit, better call them, have you got the numbers over there?”

    The only people more insane than the shooter were the administrators who gave him such a good building full of targets to mow down. Thier excuse merely makes it clear that this tragedy occurred in the scale it occurred in becuase the college administration didn’t feel that any kind of domestic dispute was worth much time or effort – and as domestic disputes disproprotionately affect women, and affects them disproprotinately harshly so that murder is still one of the leading ways for a woman to die in america, it shows a certain laissez faire attitude towards the lives of the students they’re supposed to have been protecting.

    A domestic dispute leading to a double homocide should have made them react faster, not slower.

    Muskets were state-of-the-art weapons

    No they weren’t, the flintlocks, which was the most advanced form of musket of the period, had been in existence for a hundred years or so by that point, rifling was new, but hardly used, and a flintlock musket with rifled barrel was called a… flintlock rifle, not a musket.

    By that logic, we ought to be able to buy M-16s with 30rd mags and grenade launchers.

    No, even if you were right, the state of the art weapons of the now are M4 carbines with underslung grenade launchers if not P90s and their wonderful armor peicing 9mm rounds, M-16s barely worked back in vietnam.

    Geez. *rolls eyes*

    People will get guns if they want them.

    The funny thing is that from what I know of illegal arms dealing in the UK, guns were reasonably easy and cheap to get if you knew the right people, but the bullets cost ridiculous amounts. but hte british police couldn’t find their asshole with both hands and the entire rest of their masonic order to help, let alone put hte “banned” back into “contraband”, so that’s not neccesarily a valid data point.

  149. zuzu
    April 16, 2007 at 10:56 pm

    On a blog called Feministe, it shouldn’t be me who points out that women are perfectly capable of armed self-defense. Here the killer was not some combat-trained superhero, but just an average jamoke. And unless he sneaked up behind her and put two bullets in her, she would have had some opportunity to save her life.

    Not that it would have been easy to keep a self-defense weapon secured yet within reach at all times, especially in the communal living environment of a dorm. But I would bet that she had some inkling that this man she knew might do her harm, and she could have prepared for this situation.

    Riiiiight. Because nobody with a firearm has ever been killed.

  150. April 16, 2007 at 10:57 pm

    Greg, I was referring to your statement that if the guy was Asian, that shows that this wasn’t caused by American politics, which makes it sound like Asians are not American. There are lots of people who are ethnically Asian and who are also American citizens. There are lots of people who are ethnically Asian and have lived here for much of their lives. Asian-Americans and Asian people living in the United States are just as influenced by American politics as you or I.

  151. RKMK
    April 16, 2007 at 10:57 pm

    Shorter Hector:

    Bitch wasn’t carryin’, so she was asking for a good shot in the head.

    (Bingo!)

    Levity aside, I really hate the world today.

  152. April 16, 2007 at 10:59 pm

    But I would bet that she had some inkling that this man she knew might do her harm, and she could have prepared for this situation.

    Next person who blames her — or who puts ONE OUNCE of responsibility on her shoulders for what this guy did — is banned.

  153. April 16, 2007 at 11:00 pm

    That includes suggestions as to what she could have done differently.

  154. Rhiannon
    April 16, 2007 at 11:00 pm

    Thank you Jill! The victim blaming has got to stop!

  155. Hector B.
    April 16, 2007 at 11:02 pm

    this treads awfully close to blaming the woman for her boyfriend’s behaviour.

    Sorry, not my intention at all, thanks

    Contrary to myth, we don’t all have “women’s intuition” to separate the psychos from the good guys

    If you do have the feeling that some guy you just met is creepy, or that a boyfriend may turn violent, respect that feeling.

  156. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 11:03 pm

    Sorry Jill, I thought he was here on a visa and that was my thought process. I don’t know enough about the Asian culture to comment. Just what I have seen in movies.

  157. April 16, 2007 at 11:13 pm

    Sorry Jill, I thought he was here on a visa and that was my thought process. I don’t know enough about the Asian culture to comment. Just what I have seen in movies.

    Wow.

    If I stare at this paragraph for long enough, will I go blind? If I drink enough, will I forget that I’ve seen that paragraph?

    If you do have the feeling that some guy you just met is creepy, or that a boyfriend may turn violent, respect that feeling.

    Yes, women are rountinely prone to entering into relationships with men we know are going to kill us and who we find “creepy”.

    This thread had such promise.

  158. Anon
    April 16, 2007 at 11:13 pm

    Hi. First time commentor here.

    Just wanted to add that there was one wounded asian student. The blog Classical Values had this link article. This whole thing makes me so sick I’m shaking.

  159. zuzu
    April 16, 2007 at 11:14 pm

    If you do have the feeling that some guy you just met is creepy, or that a boyfriend may turn violent, respect that feeling.

    Well, I’m certainly getting that feeling from some of the comments on this thread.

  160. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 11:18 pm

    So if someone comes here from another country on a education visa, you can blame anything they do on American Culture? I was just questioning whether that made sense or not.

  161. RKMK
    April 16, 2007 at 11:18 pm

    Well, I’m certainly getting that feeling from some of the comments on this thread.

    I know that I, for one, was particularly soothed when Greg mentioned his easy possession of a 9mm.

    Sigh.

  162. April 16, 2007 at 11:22 pm

    So if someone comes here from another country on a education visa, you can blame anything they do on American Culture? I was just questioning whether that made sense or not.

    …who was doing that?

    And where are the reports that he was here on a student visa?

  163. RobW
    April 16, 2007 at 11:25 pm

    I don’t know enough about the Asian culture to comment. Just what I have seen in movies.

    If one of those movies was Roshomon, that’d give an insight into violence towards women in Japan, at least. I just saw it last night.

    R. Mildred- Whatever. I’m no gun nut, clearly. I have heard of 18th century rifles referred to as “rifled muskets” though. Anyway, the point I made is still valid- if the commenter was seriously saying the 2nd Amendment had anything to do with that reinwhat was considered “arms” back then. Isn’t the M-4 simply the newest version of the M-16? I have heard from returning vets that the new weapon is marginally more reliable, but still a PITA to maintain in the desert. So the M16 isn’t quite state-of-the-art. It’s a military weapon, not available to citizens. And, from what I’ve read, the M4 isn’t exactly state-of-the-art either.

    Blech…. If we’re going to distract ourselves from this horror with techno-babble, can we at least talk about cars, or boats, or computers, or anything but fucking guns

    Seriously, I’m sorry I even mentioned it.

  164. Allison
    April 16, 2007 at 11:27 pm

    And where are the reports that he was here on a student visa?

    Jill,

    I think this is what Greg was talking about.

  165. ACS
    April 16, 2007 at 11:27 pm

    The truth is that this “aggression” is a taught, learned & generally accepted behaviour, much like the undercurrent of wariness most women have of men (cept most men get pissed off when you treat them as a potential threat – so not really the accepted part). It is learned, therefore it can be unlearned/coped with or rehabilitated if you prefer. But if we ignore the problem, it will all go away right? If we leave it alone and don’t dig for the roots, the weed will just die on it’s own, right? Cause it’s our probing of the subject that’s keeping it alive [not the society (aka rain and sunshine) that inculturates an ideology of violence in males, right?]

    If this “aggression” is something that men are “naturally”, then what hope is there for humanity?

    Plenty. It just means that men need to treat their aggression differently tha women. It means that men will always need to pay more attention to their aggressive behavior than women, even if cultural conditions change. It means that men will need to understand that — even if changing our behavior is swimming upstream — we need to do it anyway.

    Deviance is a male problem. Violence is a male problem. The numbers are disproportionate, and they are disproportionate in all cultures, in all places, and amongst all populations of men. It’s, I think, unsafe to conclude that there is nothing intrinsic to men that causes some men to violent, and most men to be aggressive; we can’t simply say that once men have learned the right things, they will simply act the right way without paying more attention to regulating their own behavior than an otherwise equivalent woman might.

    I’m certainly not saying this to excuse particular actions: peoples’ actions are both their fault and their responsibility. But certain things can continue to be your responsibility, even if they’re not your fault. Both privilege and propensity toward violence fall in that category — and while I feel that, someday, I may have to worry much less about my own privilege (I’m an optimist), I don’t feel the same way about my own aggression. And I’ve never even hit anyone in anger.

    — ACS

  166. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 11:30 pm

    an earlier post mentioned a visa

  167. prairielily
    April 16, 2007 at 11:31 pm

    Hector,

    Most dangerous men don’t “seem creepy” when you meet them. Creepy people often keep their creepiness hidden deep inside where it can get creepier and creepier, until they decide that it’s ok to shoot their girlfriend.

    Women generally do follow their intuition when they get a weird vibe off of someone. But we are not psychic, and do not always get that vibe.

    And then there’s the times when there is a creepy vibe, but the woman has no choice but to be around the person, like if she needs the job, or it’s her landlord, or it’s a really creepy professor, or a relative.

    In summary, don’t blame the person who got shot for not avoiding the murderous murderer. It’s not her fault, and it’s disrespectful.

    Greg,

    I’m Asian, too. My family is from Pakistan, but I was born and raised in Canada. However, I went to university in the US for a while, and while I was there, I had one of those F-1 visas. Therefore, it is perfectly possible for an Asian person to have a student visa but still have a grasp on American culture, because the person did not necessarily come straight from Asia. I also suggest you take a visit to Asia and observe how widely spread some aspects of American culture are.

    I believe someone else pointed out that the United States does not exactly hold the copyright on patriarchal misogyny.

  168. April 16, 2007 at 11:35 pm

    This thread inherently had no promise. Rashomon was set in the 9th century, after all.

  169. JM
    April 16, 2007 at 11:36 pm

    And do what, Hector? Get the gun ready? You have got to be kidding me. Guess what, if you’re a woman and somebody you know tries to rape or kill you, and you shoot him, you’re going to the big house. It’s your word against his, and we know that women are irrational scheming lunatics who constantly make stuff up out of spite to get men in trouble. Nobody will ever believe you. So you’ll avoid being raped there only to be raped by a prison guard. Hell, even if some stranger breaks into your house and you shoot him, that will become, you invited him over but asked him to appear to break in, you tried to seduce him but he resisted so you shot him, you can’t handle rejection. Get real. The jury pool is full of Gregs, so good luck.

    Henry, that’s a great point. I don’t see any influence of patriarchy in the fact that so many rejected men seem to feel entitled to take out their aggressions through murder while rejected women seem to feel entitled to take out their aggressions…ummm…I guess women don’t get rejected, then.

  170. Lisa
    April 16, 2007 at 11:36 pm

    this is my first post on feministe.

    i’d just like to deviate from the gun-talk (and the ignorance that seems to be rampant on this thread) and say that the anchors on television are awful. how can you get away with asking students “are there a lot of emotions on campus?” really?

    that is all.

  171. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 11:39 pm

    #109 said this

    fox news via chicago sun times just said that the shooter was a chinese man here on an f-1 visa

    also, the police are treating the girlfriend shooting separately

  172. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 11:40 pm

    I think that is human nature, we often don’t know what to say.

    Or they are just idiots pretending to be smarter that me and you, or you and me, or you and I. oh whatever

  173. Greg
    April 16, 2007 at 11:45 pm

    JM The jury pool is full of Gregs, so good luck

    I am saddened. I am not the person you think I am. I am not hysterical. I may be wrong from time to time, but I am not hysterical. You on the other hand have already passed judgement on me and that is quite unfortunate. I expected more. I happen to love women. Helk I love pretty much everyone. I am sorry you have this impression of me. Please give me another chance and I will do the same for you.

  174. April 16, 2007 at 11:49 pm

    For all the people suggesting the students should have been armed – almost every school is going to have a policy banning firearms and weapons from the dorms. I remember reading a friend’s dorm handbook – she attended a large state school – and they had everything from guns to shurikens on the “not allowed” list. So if I’d been in that situation, unless I somehow got the drop on the guy and beaned him with my Greek dictionary, my self-defense options would have been limited. And the same thing goes for the classroom shootings. How many students are packing heat in their backpacks? Why should they? It is a place where they work and study, not a place where lunatics with guns come in to shoot people on a regular basis.

    God. The more I hear about this, the more depressed I get. I’m gonna say a few Hail Marys and go to bed.

  175. Regina
    April 16, 2007 at 11:59 pm

    From comment #109:

    fox news via chicago sun times just said that the shooter was a chinese man here on an f-1 visa

    So Greg didn’t just pull that out of his butt.

    However, I’d still support banning him for outright stupidity. Or at least sending him off for retraining with his fingers taped to his keyboard.

  176. Mandolin
    April 17, 2007 at 12:05 am

    To all those perpetuating the meme that being male naturally makes one more aggressive than being female:

    If this is the case, and if it is an intrinsic part of maleness, then maleness just got pretty shitty, didn’t it? If it is not culturally determined (as I believe it is), then it means that men are actually just more likely to be evil.

    We’d better take measures about that as a society, don’t you think? Would you support laws to suppress hormones in all men? Would you support laws where only women are given access to guns, since they’re more likely to need them in self-defense?

    Of course not, and neither would I. But I think men can actually control themselves, because tehy aren’t biologically prone to shooting off bullets at little ladies because they can’t help themselves. Since you think the men’s fingers are just naturally trigger-happy, seems to me that you’re under an obligation to control them.

    But of course you aren’t interested in that, because you’re only interested in that meme so long as it allows you to look at the forest in front of you and be unable to see the patriarchy.

    WTF is with the trolls here and Alas over the last couple days? Did the Duke case embolden them? Are they coming out of hibernation with the sun?

  177. Henry
    April 17, 2007 at 12:06 am

    Henry, that’s a great point. I don’t see any influence of patriarchy in the fact that so many rejected men seem to feel entitled to take out their aggressions through murder while rejected women seem to feel entitled to take out their aggressions…ummm…I guess women don’t get rejected, then

    Your point has already been made several times, and I’ve already responded that in my opinion, men are more likely to respond to rejection or alienation with violence (if they’re unbalanced already, mind you) because they are more prone to violence in general, not because of some sense of “entitlement”. I’ve been in plenty of fights, and never once did I hit someone because I felt entitled to. I hit ’em because I was angry and it seemed like the right thing to do at the time. Now amplify that through the mind of someone who’s unhinged/paranoid and feels abused to the breaking point, and you get murder.

    And women do commit murder out of rejection or alienation, but of course it’s much less common. Did those cases involve “entitlement”?

  178. Mandolin
    April 17, 2007 at 12:12 am

    ” I hit ‘em because I was angry and it seemed like the right thing to do at the time. Now amplify that through the mind of someone who’s unhinged/paranoid and feels abused to the breaking point, and you get murder.”

    Ladies get angry too! :-O

  179. Mandolin
    April 17, 2007 at 12:12 am

    “And women do commit murder out of rejection or alienation, but of course it’s much less common. Did those cases involve “entitlement”?”

    A) Maybe.

    B) We’re talking social trends.

  180. Regina
    April 17, 2007 at 12:16 am

    I’ve been in plenty of fights, and never once did I hit someone because I felt entitled to. I hit ‘em because I was angry and it seemed like the right thing to do at the time.

    Tomato, tomahto. : )

  181. Lisa
    April 17, 2007 at 12:19 am

    you hit them because you were angry… because they pissed you off… so you thought they deserved to be hit? and you were the one who deserved to hit them?

    sounds like entitlement to me.

  182. Regina
    April 17, 2007 at 12:19 am

    My point is you did feel entitled to cause someone else pain. Of course you didn’t cerebralize it– sit there thinking, “Am I entitled to hit this jerk? Heck yes!”– but you did come to the quick-fast conclusion that it was okay to do what you wanted to do with impunity. “Entitlement” is not an emotion.

  183. Henry
    April 17, 2007 at 12:27 am

    then maleness just got pretty shitty, didn’t it? If it is not culturally determined (as I believe it is), then it means that men are actually just more likely to be evil.

    If by “just got”, you mean “has been for all of recorded history”, then yes. And as to your second point, exactly incorrect. My point is just that men are more likely to express their intrinsic evil through violence or aggression, and women more likely to do it through other means. Just about everyone has the potential for evil. But not all aggression is evil.

  184. brenna
    April 17, 2007 at 12:29 am

    What is a troll?

  185. Mandolin
    April 17, 2007 at 12:31 am

    “My point is just that men are more likely to express their intrinsic evil through violence or aggression, and women more likely to do it through other means. Just about everyone has the potential for evil.”

    Men kill women!

    And women… ?

    But nevermind, they’re totally equal.

  186. Henry
    April 17, 2007 at 12:32 am

    deserved to be hit? and you were the one who deserved to hit them?

    To quote a favorite movie of mine, “deservin’ ain’t got nothin’ to do with it”.

    Or another way, I never considered whether I was justified, shit just happened.

  187. exangelena
    April 17, 2007 at 12:32 am

    Oh, yes, “Asian culture”. Because China=Korea=Japan=India=Thailand=Vietnam, right?
    Some of these trolls are unintentially amusing.

  188. Mandolin
    April 17, 2007 at 12:34 am

    “I never considered whether I was justified, shit just happened.”

    And therefore its natural, as opposed to, say, evidence that you have a problem? Yes, all your problems are *totally* biological, and you have no control over them. Relieves you from having to fix them, coincidentally.

  189. Henry
    April 17, 2007 at 12:37 am

    Men kill women!

    And women… ?

    But nevermind, they’re totally equal.

    Men kill other men, too. It sucks either way. Listen, I’m not trying to justify anyone’s actions, or say that regular guys are all a walking hair-trigger. We’re talking about people who’ve lost their shit here.

  190. RobW
    April 17, 2007 at 12:38 am

    Been in a lot of fights? Any recently? I’m just saying, I haven’t been in a fight since the 8th grade.

    Maybe, just maybe, it isn’t so much that men are prone to violence, but you are? And others like you?

    And maybe, just maybe, women get angry and feel that urge to strike out but have been conditioned not to by their socialization.

    And that you, being a guy, haven’t been so conditioned? Rather, you’ve been conditioned that violence is an ok reaction to anger?

    Look, I know I’m making a lot of assumptions here about you- that’s kind of a risk anyone takes when they bring up their own personal shit in a thread like this. Maybe you are well aware of your own violent tendencies and do indeed keep them in check.

    I just don’t buy any of the “male violence is natural; it’s just the way we are” bullshit. You might as well say the devil made you do it.

    It’s learned behavior, dude. You can unlearn it.

  191. April 17, 2007 at 12:49 am

    I happen to love women.

    Greg, to learn why “I happen to love women” does not cut it as a defense, check out the Feminism 101 blog.

  192. Henry
    April 17, 2007 at 12:55 am

    Been in a lot of fights? Any recently? I’m just saying, I haven’t been in a fight since the 8th grade.

    Besides those done for training purposes, no, not in quite a while. Mellowed some as I’ve aged I guess. And I never thought violence was an “ok” reaction to anger (although sometimes it can be I guess, that’s a question for men with more of a philosophical bent than I). That doesn’t mean I didn’t do it anyway.

    And maybe, just maybe, women get angry and feel that urge to strike out but have been conditioned not to by their socialization.

    And that you, being a guy, haven’t been so conditioned?

    That would tend towards what I was getting at. Violence is natural (and ugly). Restraint and civil actions are the learned behavior.

    Why did you get in that fight in the 8th grade? Defending yourself? Just pissed off? Or did you run through a moral checklist and get a green board?

  193. Mandolin
    April 17, 2007 at 1:05 am

    “That would tend towards what I was getting at. Violence is natural (and ugly). Restraint and civil actions are the learned behavior.”

    But that ISN’T what you said.

    What you said was that men had a greater natural tendency to violence than women, not that women had their tendency toward violence schooled out of them, and men didn’t.

  194. Mandolin
    April 17, 2007 at 1:07 am

    “Men kill other men, too. It sucks either way. Listen, I’m not trying to justify anyone’s actions, or say that regular guys are all a walking hair-trigger. We’re talking about people who’ve lost their shit here. ”

    Okay.

    Men who’ve lost their shit kill men and women.

    Women who’ve lost their shit … ?

    So what is it that women do to act out their evil, which everyone you say is capable of, and which you also indicate is natural based on differences between the sexes? And how does this relieve you from needing sex-differentiated laws to protect everyone from men’s natural biological tendency to flip their shit and become murderers?

  195. JM
    April 17, 2007 at 1:11 am

    Henry, I can’t accept that. I get angry, and yes I want to hit people, I’m not going to lie. But I don’t, because no matter how angry I am, I know I’m not going to be able to get away with it. The consequences on me are going to be severe, because it’s not a boys will be boys thing, it’s me transgressing a social boundary that I’m really not supposed to cross. My parents flipped their shit when my sisters and I fought, but with the boys it was not as big a deal. And then, too, when I’m not so angry I can’t see straight, I can acknowledge intellectually that I don’t have a right to do that, that I’m not entitled to inflict punishment on somebody else just because I feel like it. And yeah, I do know people who get into a lot of fights, and they do try to justify it, not as, I was angry, it was how I felt at the time, but as “they did this, they deserved it.” Even when they know they shouldn’t have done it, it’s like, “Okay, I was wrong, but here’s what happened, here’s what they did.” It’s a sense of *justfied* anger, not just anger, and that’s entitlement. And that’s exacty what you’re talking about when you acknowledge these guys’ sense of victimization and mistreatment.

  196. Henry
    April 17, 2007 at 1:23 am

    What you said was that men had a greater natural tendency to violence than women, not that women had their tendency toward violence schooled out of them, and men didn’t.

    Well, I’m saying that both are true. I never said that women don’t have an tendency towards violence, just that it usually less strong from what I’ve seen. And everyone is socially conditioned against violence to some degree (although some more than others I guess). But social conditioning can only do so much.

    One other thing, I want to make clear that just because I think that men are more prone to aggression, that doesn’t mean I think that excuses or mitigates inappropriate behavior. People have free will and can choose to do the right thing, natural impulses don’t excuse someone’s wrong actions.

  197. king cranium maximus IV
    April 17, 2007 at 1:43 am

    misogyny, to me, implies a well-thought-out intent that was not evident in these shootings. obviously he was targeting a woman, but i seriously doubt her womanhood was the deciding factor here.

  198. RobW
    April 17, 2007 at 1:49 am

    Jebus F. Christ, dude, could you at least admit, if social conditioning can and does restrain the “natural” urge toward violence, that MEN DON’T GET SO STRONGLY CONDITIONED? Especially when it comes to violence towards women? Or that women’s conditioning is, in large part, a direct result of men’s violence toward them?

    Ah, forget it. I’m going to bed now.

  199. NewCompu
    April 17, 2007 at 2:15 am

    I never said that women don’t have an tendency towards violence, just that it usually less strong from what I’ve seen

    Well, from what I’ve seen, the people most likely to start physical conflicts are the ones most likely to have the edge in physical conflicts. Like, say, if you’re 6’4″ 280, there’s a slight chance that you’ll be more likely to initiate physical contact more often than if you’re 5’1″, 100. Why, I can not say. There’s only so much social conditioning can do, but there’s a whole lot getting badly hurt and fearing getting badly hurt and wanting to avoid getting badly hurt can seem to do to even the scrappiest, most violent tendencies in terms of keeping them in check. Odd, that.

  200. Henry
    April 17, 2007 at 2:22 am

    MEN DON’T GET SO STRONGLY CONDITIONED? Especially when it comes to violence towards women?

    Sure, why not, if we’re shouting about it. That second part is silly though. If we’re talking about the message society sends to men and boys, a man commiting violence against a woman is considered to be much worse than against a man (and rightly so). Is there anywhere that’s not true? Maybe I don’t know the same people you all do.

  201. Mandolin
    April 17, 2007 at 2:40 am

    “Maybe I don’t know the same people you all do. ”

    Or maybe you don’t understand much about the difference between overt social messages and covert ones.

  202. king cranium maximus IV
    April 17, 2007 at 3:47 am

    explain.

  203. Keller
    April 17, 2007 at 4:03 am

    wow have i got far too much to

    say than i think my level of energy will allow. Please bare with me.

    Psychopaths and sociopaths regularly target women — the one who grew up down the street from me stabbed a 15 yo girl to death when he was 18. She was on her way home from school. He was then committed to a mental institution. When he was later determined to be sane, he was released. He then stabbed a women in her early 20s using a knife from her kitchen drawer.

    Anecdotal at BEST

    Umm… no they wouldn’t have. The last thing that would have made this situation better is two armed nutters exchanging fire in a dorm.

    One of your “armed nutters” with good aim could have ended this quickly.

    This shouldn’t be a surprise because of tragedies such as the VT shootings. I support the 2nd Amendment, but we have to be realistic here.
    Nah, this really doesn’t happen too often. There are a lot of reasons to protect the right to bear arms.
    MN, even if the college students were armed to the teeth, a maniac with two 9 mm handguns fully loaded would not have let them defend themselves. Besides, the average college student isn’t trained to kill and the maniac would have just shot the student before s/he could even reach for his/her gun.
    Expect a new assault weapons ban and stricter gun control. :(

    In Texas to obtain a concealed carry license one is required to be trained in shooting. you also make the assumption that those with a concealed carry permit would be first trageted.

    And more black men are in prison than white men. If the fact plays out the truth, is the “truth” that black men are “naturally” more aggressive?
    The race analogy isn’t perfect, but keep in mind that when it comes to gender, socialization is pretty powerful.

    this ignores completely the unjust and inequitable prosecution of black men in the united states (arguements against this should be addressed shortly (if im still awake))

    You make a lot of assumptions here you simply cannot support. How come armed students couldn’t have defended themselves? Because you said so?
    Simple, it takes more time for a student to pull out his or her handgun than it would for a maniac to kill him/her. A gunman is not going to let a student defend himself or herself you know. You have to be realistic here.

    Said gunmen would have had to have known who to treat as a primary threat. (cheap shot incoming) maybe if some of the womyn on this forum had had a shotgun in there backpacks (ok, i guess i should have said purses) he may have not have “achieved” so much in the way of mass murder.

    If a couple are in a loud argument and their neighbors call the cops, that’s a domestic dispute. If a credible threat of violence is made, that’s assault. If someone gets hit, that’s battery. Hit with a weapon, aggravated battery. Killed, that’s a homicide.
    Dozens killed? Various words describe it- “domestic dispute” isn’t one of them.
    A single person killed in a major city is, of course, directly equivalent to a massacre on a small-town college campus.

    .

    At the time, there was no reason to believe that such a heinous act was going to be comitted as no established precedent had been recognized that would have led them to believe that one would. Hind site is not a valid argument in this case.

    Could we leave the speculation of him being a psycho killing mysoginist off the table until there is something to actually support it?

    I myself made this point and yours is very well expressed but ignored by the masses of this Blog. Surprised, not at all

    9mm is one of the weakest calibers of pistol cartridge and is at the bottom of the list when considering a “personal defense” load. .22 LR is almost a joke when it comes to shooting anything larger than small rabbits.
    Gosh, and hemanaged to slaughter 32 with these wimpy ass girly weapons? Amazing. Just goes to show we need sat least emis to have any hope to prevail against the cottontail set.

    Ok, follow me on this one, I am going to assume that at least a handful of people who’ve responded to this have a vehicle at their disposal. If you were to take this “tool” and run down as many people as you were capable of, would this argument stand against the litmus test of common sense for more than a few seconds? Honestly, think about it.

    Cringe is powerful word. I cringe when I see 32 college kids killed. But someone using tragedy to advance an agenda is not really a suprise on this site.

    And by having no comment, i find myself (and greg or henry (not sure which one)) saying alot.

    You all notice that the girl at the top of the screen is wielding a gun. I think this suggests that women can empower themselves by becoming proficient in arms use and carrying guns. Thoughts?
    Finally, an interesting point.
    If this does turn out to be yet another anti-woman massacre, I’ll be willing to institute a ban on MALE gun ownership. Including my own.



    Wearing the stinky cologne of a victim helps no one. And i mean no one.

    Okay.
    Men who’ve lost their shit kill men and women.
    Women who’ve lost their shit … ?

    …are so prevalent as to have 9 distinct categories. the most common referred too as black widows. Though their crimes tend not to be motivated by rage and anger, 75% of women serial killers are motivated by financial gain. Forgive me for not seeing the intrinsic difference both between men and women who have “lost their shit” and mass murder in this context, and the utter lack of remorse that is necessary for both “mass murder” and serial killing. That is not to say that the “fairer sex” is immune to emotionally charged acts of retribution (violent or not). As Bill once said, “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”

    its been a long day for all of us im sure, Please forgive poor grammar and seppeliing and evaluate my opinions from non biased eyes.

    That being said, FIRE!

  204. Keller
    April 17, 2007 at 4:12 am

    oh man/womyn, i was just looking over my post and noticed some acute formatting errors that ive not the energy nor inclination to deal with at this time. please exercise caution in deciphering the ramblings of a man celebrating the return of a deported friend.

  205. Donna
    April 17, 2007 at 4:28 am

    On a blog called Feministe, it shouldn’t be me who points out that women are perfectly capable of armed self-defense. Here the killer was not some combat-trained superhero, but just an average jamoke. And unless he sneaked up behind her and put two bullets in her, she would have had some opportunity to save her life.

    On a blog called Feministe, you shouldn’t be surprised to be the only one blaming the victim.

  206. Hector B.
    April 17, 2007 at 5:33 am

    With hindsight I can see how I seemed to be blaming the victim, although that was not my intent. This particular killer is not the only cowardly misogynist who feels entitled to punish women. To tilt the odds in his favor he wore a bulletproof vest, and went armed in a place which denies arms to the residents. So, I was wondering what could other women do in the same situation, to take away the gunman’s advantage until the police arrive. There seemed to be a couple of obvious limitations:

    First, no normal person would want to be on alert for an unknown attacker 24/7. Second, despite the claims of the gun nuts, people do not protect strangers from being shot. For self-defense, most woman are on their own. But I have known women who went through the training course, and recommended it.

    So that was my motivation for posting.

  207. Ledasmom
    April 17, 2007 at 5:57 am

    Well, from what I’ve seen, the people most likely to start physical conflicts are the ones most likely to have the edge in physical conflicts. Like, say, if you’re 6′4″ 280, there’s a slight chance that you’ll be more likely to initiate physical contact more often than if you’re 5′1″, 100

    Yes, I’ve always figured this is most of the reason why female serial killers who kill healthy adults are relatively rare: just that much more chance of the victim turning the tables.
    However, the number of female serial killers who’ve killed children or the sick shouldn’t allow anyone to be complacent about the supposed less-violent nature of women.

  208. April 17, 2007 at 6:19 am

    “So you think that he shot two people dead in the morning at his girlfriend’s dorm and then went off on a totally unrelated murderous spree two hours later for no reason at all?

    Geez, I hope they don’t put you on the jury. Or any jury. “

    Huh?
    The reports, as of last night(you know, when people who weren’t there and didn’t know anyone involved were deciding they had this all figured out) they were not sure the earlier shootings were part of the later shootings. They did not even know if he was a student until overnight. In fact, it was only hours ago morning, they are saying they were connected (and yet, even this morning news reports have authorities saying they are not sure they are, and are doing ballistic tests).

    I am NOT saying they aren’t. I am asking that we show some restraint before trying to shoehorn our agendas (video games, gun control, violence in movies, etc) into it. Am I really being unreasonable?

    And I can understand why you would not want me on a jury. I don’t go in assuming I already know what’s going on. I would base my decision on the case as presented, not theories from TV and hearsay. Man, am I a threat to justice!

  209. the15th
    April 17, 2007 at 6:47 am

    I don’t want to link to this, but the UK Metro is actually running a headline about the “girl who led to massacre.” The story refers to her as a “teenage student who may have sparked the biggest gun massacre in US history.”

  210. Miller
    April 17, 2007 at 7:41 am

    What will it take to realize that that at the heart of male-inflicted domestic violence is misogyny? Batterers hold female partners as hostage, backed up by the threat of violence. A batterer sees her as the scapegoat, the cause of all his misery. The root of that anger is itself misogynistic. The “Crazy bitch!” apologists fail to ask, “If she’s so fucked up, why didn’t he just leave her?” Because he needed her. Desperately. The only way batterers can cope with their feelings of frustration is to hold a female responsible. Their use of a relationship is just a ploy to find a hostage. His violence is not self-defense, which is justifiable, but based in anger over hurt feelings, and our culture glorifies violence as a way for males to deal with such frustration. Psychologists show that a batterer will not only kill his female hostage (girlfriend or ex) but will destroy anything that she loved, as in the case of killing her children, family, or even pets (Hence, the slaughter at the engineering buildings).
    The fact that DV is so damn systemic exposes a culture behind it. People have got to look past individual songs or videos and look at their message and, most importantly, sales. Why is it that so many people endorse their message? That’s the question.

  211. Miller
    April 17, 2007 at 7:43 am

    Feministe needs to cut out the misogynistic trolls here. They’re so damn obvious. It’s one thing to question, it’s another thing to endorse dogma in spite of the objective facts and evidence.

  212. R. Mildred
    April 17, 2007 at 8:54 am

    the people most likely to start physical conflicts are the ones most likely to have the edge in physical conflicts.

    This is wrong actually, because there is the infamous “short man’s disease” which leads to tiny little shrimps of men to express their anger at the world for making them a short arse.

    The big bulky bouncers were no problem back in the days when I used to violently vent my anger at club bouncers, it was the teeny little ones who’s faces looked like rats, because the shorter they were, and the uglier they were, the more violent they tended to be.

    Violence is not about capabilities, it’s about willingness to be violent, and that willingness is trained out of women (who aren’t generally allowed to even be angry, everyone knows of those asshole strangers who tell women to “smile!”? How many of those we got in tonight?) and trained into men – size really doesn’t matter, not with gun crimes, not with beating people to death with frying pans then eating their brains crimes.

  213. Raging Moderate
    April 17, 2007 at 9:25 am

    Here in Canada, it is estimated that there are between 7 and 11 million guns. It is also estimated that between 1/4 to 1/3 of all Canadian households contain at least one gun.

    But the Canadian murder rate (with guns as the weapon) is approximately 1/8th of the American rate.

    So I think the real question is (paraphrasing Michael Moore in “Bowling for Columbine”) why do Americans shoot each other so much more frequently than other nationalities?

  214. exangelena
    April 17, 2007 at 9:37 am

    “If we’re talking about the message society sends to men and boys, a man commiting violence against a woman is considered to be much worse than against a man (and rightly so). Is there anywhere that’s not true? Maybe I don’t know the same people you all do.”
    That would be if a man’s committing violence against a woman that’s not “his”. I think it’s much more excused for men to commit violence against women who are viewed as their property – wives, girlfriends, daughters, etc. That’s why marital rape is legal in most states (if R. Mildred comes back she can fill in for me).

  215. April 17, 2007 at 9:39 am

    Hm. All this talk of violence and gender reminds me of my childhood.

  216. April 17, 2007 at 9:43 am

    Lots of evpsych being offered up as “reason.” Let me guess: You’re dudes, right? Maybe you should quit while you’re ahead.

  217. exangelena
    April 17, 2007 at 9:44 am

    Follow-up:
    In the infamous Kitty Genovese case, where a woman was raped and murdered by a man who had followed her home and people who were watching did nothing, most of them thought that the rape and murder was “a lover’s spat” and saw no need to intervene.

  218. Frumious B
    April 17, 2007 at 9:52 am

    You all notice that the girl at the top of the screen is wielding a gun. I think this suggests that women can empower themselves by becoming proficient in arms use and carrying guns. Thoughts?

    That gun represents a penis.

  219. Frumious B
    April 17, 2007 at 10:07 am

    According to CNN, the shooter was a Korean, not Chinese. Before he was identified (that is, his name), he was known to be Asian.

    The earlier reports of a person being arrested may have been referring to the ‘person of interest,” who was a friend of one of the first two victims. That person was not under arrest.

    As of this mornings NPR news report, it is not clear that a single shooter is responsible for all the killings. Ballistics tests are being conducted to determine just that. Results should be in later today.

    —-

    Kitty Genovese – The neighbors could see and hear a lot less than the news reports made it sound like. None of them saw the whole sequence, only one of them was aware she had been stabbed.

  220. April 17, 2007 at 10:17 am

    Where does the “What horrible thing must she have done to him” meme come from, anyway?

    My ex said the same thing after the killing of those Amish girls. “I guess I’ll just have to speculate on what a bunch of 12 year old girls had done to him when he was younger to make him do this to these girls”. Same thing with Lepine. Same thing with the other shootings.

    Does it just make people feel better or something? “Oh, I know, he’s got a reason!”

    @ King Cranium

    misogyny, to me, implies a well-thought-out intent that was not evident in these shootings. obviously he was targeting a woman, but i seriously doubt her womanhood was the deciding factor here.

    What do you think *was* the deciding factor, then?

    Also, if you ever do a Feministe-specific bingo card, will the free space be “Look at the gun-toting little girl in the masthead”?

  221. Amanda
    April 17, 2007 at 10:32 am

    Keller,
    Please learn the difference between “bare” and “bear.”
    Thank you.

  222. Torri
    April 17, 2007 at 10:37 am

    I don’t want to link to this, but the UK Metro is actually running a headline about the “girl who led to massacre.” The story refers to her as a “teenage student who may have sparked the biggest gun massacre in US history.”

    oh… just, gah…. *head desk*

    secondly I’d like to object to the thought that shooting back is the only way to possibly deal with a gun-nut. I live in Australia where we have gun bans, a while ago there was a guy who tried to shoot up his university but two other students managed to jump him when he started to change weapons.
    Age Article
    I’m only bringing this up to the idea that ‘if we all had our guns with us we’d be safe’ mentality and in case someone tries to put words in my mouth I’ll say it preemptively: I am not trying to compare these two different tragedies.

  223. Rose
    April 17, 2007 at 10:47 am

    Anna – so glad he’s your “ex” and not your “current”!

    After the Happy Land fire, there was much open blame cast upon the woman (who I think, though I’m not certain, was killed in the fire). It was truly disgusting.

    Yesterday, I heard some rumors going around about how he’d “caught her cheating” or some bullshit like that. Men who are defending this shit – please stop! You dehumanize yourselves in this more than anyone…there was no “reason” and the only way this could have been stopped is if the fucking stupid asses at VT had determined that someone who just shot two people execution style in their dorm would be dangerous to others. They didn’t. They brazenly put out today that they “had no reason” to suspect that he was dangerous. Except for the part where he had just executed two people.

    Sick, sick, sick. It didn’t have to happen like this. That’s why they call it a “precaution” instead of a “postcaution”

    I’ve also heard a lot of people say that they “couldn’t” just close the school, but they did just that when there was an escaped convict on the grounds last year. So really, of course they could have. They just didn’t.

    Stupid fuckers….heckuva job, Brownie…our new national motto, huh?

  224. Pingback: Jon Swift
  225. Miller
    April 17, 2007 at 10:53 am

    That’s dogma for you: she must have done something to have caused this (Men throughout history have shown a biological impossibility to ever commit aggressive violence and women use magic to cause him to commit actions against his will). Oh, and the violence directed at her for the injustice that is hurt feelings justifies her very death, even if his hurt feelings were self-inflicted from an inability to fucking cope with setback (Again, she should use her magical powers to solve his problems for him). Oh, and women don’t know what it’s like to be a woman dealing with violent hate, in spite of first-hand experience, only men do.
    I love when bigots accuse women of being the hyper-sensitive drama queens whining about rape and DV, which is just bad manners, but their “Hurt feelings!” is a crime against humanity that can only be rederessed via murder. Can you imagine the uproar if a woman went on a rampage if her boyfriend didn’t solve her emotional problems for her?

  226. Rhiannon
    April 17, 2007 at 10:54 am

    Re: Men are “naturally monsters” see this site:

    http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/06/17/i-am-not-my-cock/

    Hm. All this talk of violence and gender reminds me of my childhood.

    Me too.

  227. lizvelrene
    April 17, 2007 at 11:12 am

    At the time, there was no reason to believe that such a heinous act was going to be comitted as no established precedent had been recognized that would have led them to believe that one would. Hind site is not a valid argument in this case.

    The point being that a double murder is already heinous. Even if it was “just a domestic dispute”. If the school and the police had treated a double murder more seriously, and at least fucking canceled classes for the day, the other 30-odd deaths could have been prevented.

    Using the current operating principles in this culture, the school will be able to rationalize their action, but that doesn’t make them any less wrong. The perception of domestic violence needs to change. It’s sad that it takes the additional 30 dead people for someone to take notice that something is seriously fucking wrong.

  228. Donna Darko
    April 17, 2007 at 12:03 pm

    The point being that a double murder is already heinous. Even if it was “just a domestic dispute”. If the school and the police had treated a double murder more seriously, and at least fucking canceled classes for the day, the other 30-odd deaths could have been prevented.

    I’ve been horrified watching all the coverage. Another factor is the police must have seen a dead Asian woman, a dead black RA, and figured an Asian man killed the girlfriend. The fact she was Asian may have made them think it was a private affair between two “foreigners” and that the Asian man fled campus afterwards and that there would be no further violence. If the murderer was perceived to be white, they may have locked down campus in fear he would kill more. I wonder if the race of the victim had anything to do with the lax reaction.

  229. Frumious B
    April 17, 2007 at 12:29 pm

    Where did this whole “he was looking for his girlfriend” thing originate? I didn’t see that in the Times article Jill linked. I read the Metro article, but it doesn’t give a source confirming a relationship between the shooter and the female dorm victim.

    I ask because now that the shooter has been identified, he is described as a loner who didn’t talk to anyone. There is no mention of him having any girlfriend. Absent an actual source who knew the victim and knew she was dating the killer, the girlfriend rumors are just that (which is not to excuse the police writing off any DV incident as “just domestic violence.”)

    This article in the Guardian references him stalking several women. They don’t say who the source is.

  230. Frumious B
    April 17, 2007 at 12:36 pm

    Another factor is the police must have seen a dead Asian woman, a dead black RA, and figured an Asian man killed the girlfriend.

    The dead woman is Anglo. The news report I heard on NPR said that the RA went downstairs to tell a fighting couple to keep it down, and the killer shot the woman and the RA. I don’t know if there were eyewitnesses to the dispute or the murder. The interpretation of the RA’s actions may be speculation. If there were no (living) eyewitnesses, no one may have known that the killer was Asian.

  231. whimsy
    April 17, 2007 at 12:56 pm

    Personally, I would like to point out as anecdotal evidence that I am 5’3″, 110 pounds, and get into as many fights as my male friends. Partially because I’m a violent metalhead, and partially because when I drink I get belligerent, but saying that women are not as prone to violence as men? When I’m angry I don’t think about my feelings, I punch things. And people.

    It’s socialization, pure and simple. I’m just poorly socialized.

  232. Donna Darko
    April 17, 2007 at 1:05 pm

    Thanks, I just read that too

    He killed two people, a senior identified as Ryan Clark, from Augusta, Ga., and a freshman identified by other students on her floor as Emily Hilscher.

    I’ve been talking about Asian Americans and mental health for years and have spoken to the director of a national Asian American mental health agency who said mental health services need to be tailored to Asians and even specific ethnicities. I went through counseling when I was younger and they often didn’t know what to do with me because they didn’t understand Chinese American culture. She said more Asian Americans need to go into the mental health and counseling fields because it’s definitely taboo to talk about it. That’s another thing. Everyone needs to talk about mental health more and give parity to mental health with regards to health insurance.

  233. Donna Darko
    April 17, 2007 at 1:16 pm

    Cho was a English major whose creative writing was so disturbing that he was referred to the school’s counseling service.

    News reports also said he may have been taking medication for depression, that he was becoming increasingly violent and erratic, and that he left a note in his dorm in which he railed against ‘‘rich kids,’’ ‘‘debauchery’’ and ‘‘deceitful charlatans’’ on campus.

    […]

    ‘‘He was a loner, and we’re having difficulty finding information about him,’’ school spokesman Larry Hincker said.

    Professor Carolyn Rude, chairwoman of the university’s English department, said she did not personally know the gunman. But she said she spoke with Lucinda Roy, the department’s director of creative writing, who had Cho in one of her classes and described him as ‘‘troubled.’’

    ‘‘There was some concern about him,’’ Rude said. ‘‘Sometimes, in creative writing, people reveal things and you never know if it’s creative or if they’re describing things, if they’re imagining things or just how real it might be. But we’re all alert to not ignore things like this.’’

    She said Cho was referred to the counseling service, but she said she did not know when, or what the outcome was. Rude refused to release any of his writings or his grades, citing privacy laws.

    Cho reportedly left a note in his dorm room that included a rambling list of grievances.

  234. twf
    April 17, 2007 at 1:50 pm

    Current reports are that Cho was not dating Hilscher, though he may very well have been stalking her. The police first detained Hilscher’s boyfriend, before the second shooting started.

    I’m sorry, I don’t have sources right now; I’ve been reading about this all over. A good secondary source is the Wikipedia article:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Virginia_Tech_shooting
    and it’s talk page.

  235. R. Mildred
    April 17, 2007 at 2:02 pm

    Ooo, apparently some random photographer was arrested as soon as the police heard that the shooter was “asian”.

    Another level of fucked upness to the whole wonderful plughole of pubic hair that is this event.

  236. Charlton Heslon
    April 17, 2007 at 2:04 pm

    Tragic tragic, tragic. This would not have happened to you fruit basket loving, gun toting right to bear arms Yanks if you just got this urge for weaponry under control. All you stupid fucks that think owning gun is Constititional et al, think again, and think about the 30 some odd innocent people that paid the price.

    “Handguns are made for killing, Mr Saturday night good special”

    Lynyrd Skynryrd

  237. Blueberry
    April 17, 2007 at 2:05 pm

    Can let the bodies cool first before we try to politicize this event? I don’t even know how this shooting was misogynistic. Sure, the guy MIGHT have been motivated by an argument with a woman, but then he went ahead and shot a whole bunch men and women.

    Does the fact that he was an equal opportunity-mass-murderer make you feel better?

  238. pmoney
    April 17, 2007 at 2:07 pm

    Wow. I’m glad the STALKINGS didn’t tip anyone off.

    WTF is wrong with this world?!? I’m not saying the authorities (whoever they were…administrators? cops? campus security?) should’ve been psychic (and even if they were, what could they have done?) but to pretend that there were no warning signs is insincere at best.

  239. Cherri
    April 17, 2007 at 2:09 pm

    the shooting was not misogynist as you’ll see here

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6564075.stm

    there were about equal number of deaths for both men and women.. and a lot more professors than I had originally thought.

  240. NewCompu
    April 17, 2007 at 4:00 pm

    This is wrong actually, because there is the infamous “short man’s disease” which leads to tiny little shrimps of men to express their anger at the world for making them a short arse.

    Yeah, I’m aware of the short but scrappy phenomenon, but in my experience, it can’t go on forever. A short person who gets his ass kicked enough by someone twice his size eventually learns to chill out a bit usually, or at least find someone smaller to pick on, at least from what I’m seen. Male or female, fear is or at least can be one limiting factor when it comes to taking on someone who’s much more likely to be successful in beating you up severely (yeah, size matters) when it comes to just a bare knuckles fight.

    Where does the “What horrible thing must she have done to him” meme come from, anyway? My ex said the same thing after the killing of those Amish girls. “I guess I’ll just have to speculate on what a bunch of 12 year old girls had done to him when he was younger to make him do this to these girls”.

    Not from any sense of justification or entitlement, ask Henry. Weird, though, how almost everyone has stories about guys who regarded the men who committed these massacres as either heroes or sympathetic figures. I suspect that if a woman killed a whole bunch of men we’d hear a lot more about the gendered nature of the crime.

  241. JennaJ
    April 17, 2007 at 4:26 pm

    The point being that a double murder is already heinous. Even if it was “just a domestic dispute”. If the school and the police had treated a double murder more seriously, and at least fucking canceled classes for the day, the other 30-odd deaths could have been prevented.

    Yup. The point is is that you have an armed crazy person who shot two people outside in daylight unaccounted for, and the school’s attitude is “he got what he came for, no possible danger to anyone else.” If they’d taken rudimentary security measures, like posting cops all over campus at all the buildings, cancelling classes, this could have been prevented.

  242. Donna Darko
    April 17, 2007 at 4:52 pm

    24 of the last 25 school shootings were by males so it’s a gender issue. (I don’t have the source for this but I read it somewhere yesterday). The one shooting by a female only injured another female. We really need to examine was passes as masculinity in this country to prevent massacres like this and the killing of millions through war.

  243. April 17, 2007 at 5:22 pm

    Where did this whole “he was looking for his girlfriend” thing originate? I didn’t see that in the Times article Jill linked.

    It was in the Times article when I linked it. They may have updated it since then.

  244. JP
    April 17, 2007 at 5:26 pm

    the shooting was not misogynist as you’ll see here

    If reports on the shooter stalking a woman are correct, and the first shooting was targeted at a woman, it was misogynist. The second part may not have been targeted at women specifically, but it follows from some earlier examples of mass killing at universities (1927 in Bath, Michigan; 1966 in Texas) where the shooter killed a wife or ex-partner first, then moved to a different location where he murdered a hell of a lot more people.

    While not all school shootings have targeted women specifically, I think there have been enough in recent years (as mentioned by Jill) to see a serious epidemic of woman-hating. I would also argue that the culture of violence that leads to these murders is inherently misogynist. I’m curious as to whether others agree. Thoughts?

  245. Frumious B
    April 17, 2007 at 5:54 pm

    twf Says:
    April 17th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
    Current reports are that Cho was not dating Hilscher, though he may very well have been stalking her. The police first detained Hilscher’s boyfriend, before the second shooting started.

    which is pretty interesting, given the intimations here that the police didn’t take a DV call seriously. most killers of women are intimates of the women. who did the cops detain? the boyfriend. sounds like they did their profiling correctly, if not accurately.

    I want to know more about the stalker reports. did they come from women who were stalked? did they come from someone saying, “yeah, man, that guy was weird, a real stalker type”? the source of this information for many news outlets appears to be the Chicago Tribune. the Tribune didn’t identify their source.

    it is possible that there’s not a misogynist bent to this spree. I’m waiting for more info before I decide.

  246. Donna Darko
    April 17, 2007 at 6:05 pm

    Frumious, it was part of the note

    A government official, who spoke of condition of anonymity because he had not been authorized to discuss details of the case, said the note had been described to him as “anti-woman, anti-rich kid.”

    The Chicago Tribune reported on its Web site that the note railed against “rich kids,””debauchery” and “deceitful charlatans” on campus. ABC, citing law enforcement sources, said that the note, several pages long, explains Cho’s actions and says, “You caused me to do this.”

    Col. Steve Flaherty, superintendent of the Virginia State Police, said there was no evidence so far that Cho left a suicide note, but he said authorities were going through a considerable number of writings.

    Citing unidentified sources, the Tribune also said Cho had recently set a fire in a dorm room and had stalked some women.

  247. JennaJ
    April 17, 2007 at 6:24 pm

    Frumious B, most people are saying the school did not take the DV seriously because they did not do anything to secure the campus when a gunman was on the loose. It’s wonderful that they went to talk to the woman’s boyfriend, if not, you know, her stalker, but in the meantime their attitude seems to have been oh well, domestic dispute, these things happen, why should anyone else fear this killer potentially running around? Don’t break his heart, he won’t hurt you, you’ll be fine. All they knew about the situation was that a man and a woman had been arguing and both she and her RA had died, and they failed to deal with the possibility that the shooter might still be around and might be going after someone else. “We didn’t do anything because we thought it was just a domestic dispute.” That really doesn’t give me a lot of confidence in their judgment that they apparently think DV perps are somehow motivated by some semi-rational impulse and not a danger to the larger community.

  248. R. Mildred
    April 17, 2007 at 6:35 pm

    Actually the fact that the college labelled the first two killings as “a domestic dispute” and then did jack shit gives it a misogynistic bent, that the shooter also began his killing sprees (spreeii? what is the plural of a killing spree?) by specifically targetting a woman before ramping the misogyny up to general purpose misanthropy, gives it a misogynistic bent.

    The whole thing also has a community mental health bent, a institutional incompetence bent and a few other bents, not least of which is the bent that involves me beating people to death with a stick if they keep nitpicking.

  249. Frumious B
    April 17, 2007 at 9:47 pm

    Donna – not seeing the word stalker in that note. I do see the words “unidentified sources.”

    Jenna and RM – so, detaining the most likely suspect in a domestic violence dispute is doing jack shit? The dorm murders were 2 hours before the others. They didn’t know Cho was stalking anyone when Hilscher and Clark (remember him?) were killed. They didn’t know Cho even existed at that point. Why would they look for a stalker they didn’t know existed when they had the most likely suspect at hand? Let me repeat, most women who are killed are killed by intimates. The police detained her boyfriend. That’s called doing something. 20/20 hindsight is awesome, but cops aren’t clairvoyant. They didn’t have wikipedia talk at 7:15 am.

  250. Frumious B
    April 17, 2007 at 10:43 pm

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/18/us/18virginia.html?hp

    After two people, Emily Jane Hilscher, a freshman, and Ryan Clark, the resident adviser whose room was nearby in the dormitory, were shot dead, the campus police began searching for Karl D. Thornhill, who was described in Internet memorials as Ms. Hilscher’s boyfriend.

    According to a search warrant filed by the police, Ms. Hilscher’s roommate had told the police that Mr. Thornhill, a student at nearby Radford University, had guns at his town house. The roommate told the police that she had recently been at a shooting range with Mr. Thornhill, the affidavit said, leading the police to believe he may have been the gunman.

    But as they were questioning Mr. Thornhill, reports came in of widespread shooting at Norris Hall, making it clear that they had not contained the threat on campus. Mr. Thornhill was not arrested, although he continues to be an important witness in the case, the police said.

  251. NewCompu
    April 17, 2007 at 11:16 pm

    Frumious, you’re kidding, right? It’s a freaking college campus. They’re responsible for protecting their students. The people who are paying to be there and live in a safe environment. Hey, you make a great point, they didn’t know Cho was stalking anyone (maybe, if he was indeed stalking these women it’s likely it was brought to somebody’s attention). For that matter, they also didn’t know anything about this girl’s situation with her boyfriend. Here’s the thing, though, they did know that someone SHOT TWO PEOPLE. They know that there’s an armed man on their campus who’s killed students. Hey, he shot a chick, gotta be the boyfriend. Chicks only only ever get shot by the boyfriend. No we didn’t find him standing over the bodies with a gun, nobody IDed him, but why quibble. Let’s go get him, fail to take any precautions, don’t tell anyone to leave campus, and if it’s not him, hey, that leaves guy with gun still running around campus killing sitting ducks? Yeah, well, maybe think about that possibility after afternoon nap. It doesn’t take anything beyond basic common sense to think that maybe there’s a problem when you have someone yet-to-be-determined on campus killing your students.

    Clark (remember him?)

    Yeah, thanks for not being an asshat. We do remember him. And see, that’s another problem. Because if we’re supposed to think along with VT that abusive boyfriends only pop their girlfriends and would never dream of hurting anyone else, whoops. This guy already killed somebody else. Wow. That’s random violence. Seems like he might be a real danger, huh? Well, let’s hope we got the right guy, the only guy, based on no actual evidence but statistical probabilities, I’d hate to think what might happen if we just took the attitude of “ehhh, let’s hope for the best” in an ongoing emergency crisis situation.

    But I have no doubt that if this guy had killed two men and the cops excused not doing anything about the possibility of a gun toting maniac running around with, “Dudes are way more likely to popped by guys they know. We figured he popped who he came for and that was the end of it, yeah he killed one other guy but why wouldn’t he stop there? We were totally interviewing his best friend!” then that would be accepted as reasonable, proactive police work that’s all about public safety. Hindsight, it would take a clairvoyant to predict any problems with that scenario.

  252. R. Mildred
    April 17, 2007 at 11:17 pm

    They didn’t know Cho was stalking anyone when Hilscher and Clark (remember him?) were killed.

    you mean the guy cho wasn’t specifically targeting? The guy who’s death must have confused the hell out of the campus police; it’s a domestic dispute, we think a guy killed both his male and female lovers.

    So clearly it’s not misogynistic because the college thought it was a bisexual domestic dispute – which is why they didn’t pay much attention to it. It’s all about the bi menz obviously.

    It would also explain why the email they sent out told students to “be cautious of a man who is believed to be armed and may in fact sleep on both sides of the bed if you get what I mean. If he attempts to kiss you and you’re a guy, react in over exaggerated horror while secretly getting mildly turned on.”

    so, detaining the most likely suspect in a domestic violence dispute is doing jack shit?

    So in between arresting the wrong man for the crime, and releasing that pissant email warning of the fact that the killer was still at large – not putting it on the speakers that there’d been a few murders and that the college was closing down or anything that would have saved lives, oh no, an email message telling people to “be cautious” because, umm… what was it again? oh right A CRAZY MAN WITH A GUN IS GOING AROUND KILLING PEOPLE! – they knew that the boyfriend wasn’t the killer and yet… an email was the best they could do?

    Oh right, they did launched into some sort of inexplicable ethnic profiling thing after the second lot of shootings was underway – and succeeded in nabbing one random asian student with a camera. while the shooting was still going on. Presumably because the sound of gunfire was a routine thing in the engineering section of the college, and so the police felt they had the time and leisure to just arrest any old asian guy – which I think is fair enough becuase they all do look alike, and also project a field that makes us roundeyes unable to tell whether or not any particular asian is currently proceeding to go around shooting people for shits and venting.

    If someone shoots two people on the campus the school should shut down – doesn’t matter if they think they’ve got the killer or not, the college should have sent everyone away on the basic principle of the thing, seeing as two people had been killed – the failier to do which would have looked fucking odd anyway had the killings actually stopped at just those first two – but they didn’t, and even when they knew the killer was still around somewhere, they decided that drawing too much attention to the fact that an armed killer was wandering the grounds would have been uncouth or something.

  253. Tony
    April 17, 2007 at 11:35 pm

    Jill, this blog is about feminism? That is your defense for making a cheap political point? Well that just explains it all then!

    Look, you have a good point in that there is a theme of misogyny running through these shootings, and that some stories are already shamefully exploiting this tragedy by blaming the first victim/young lady.

    As someone who isn’t exactly exposed to feminist theory often I find this blog enlightening, I enjoy reading it. All I was asking was that maybe you can wait a day before you start making your political points regarding this tragedy . . . but I guess that was too much to ask.

  254. April 17, 2007 at 11:54 pm

    Understandable, Tony. Honestly, I was posting as I refreshed my NYTimes page every 15 seconds (I don’t have a TV) and it was just kind of a stream-of-consciousness thing. There was some reason why I had looked into school shootings a week or two ago (I’m too lazy to search the archives right now) and I noticed the misogyny thing then. When this happened, and I heard it was in the Engineering department, I thought of Lepine. And then when I heard that he went on his spree after killing his girlfriend (or the woman he stalked) and that the school didn’t respond because they thought it was a “domestic disturbance,” it kind of came together.

    I wasn’t doing it to score a cheap political point. I’m not sure how else to explain this, other than to say that I do view the world from a particular perspective — feminism is what I write about, what I study, what I read, and what I want to do with my life. It colors how I interpret things. To me, the gender thing wasn’t political — if I had somehow blamed the pro-life movement or right-wing extremists, then to me, that would have been political. To me, pointing out gender issues or misogyny isn’t always for the furtherance of a political ideal. It’s an observation, the same way I’m sure a lot of people observed during the Columbine era, “Wow, there are a lot of angry white boys shooting up schools” without trying to blame men or whiteness or making a political point about the 2nd amendment.

    My intention was not to promote a political ideal. I was reacting as it was being reported, the same way everyone else was. That was my reaction. I didn’t over-think it when I posted it, any more than I over-thought posting that this is the deadliest school shooting in American history. I’m sorry that it came across as my trying to score a political point.

  255. zuzu
    April 18, 2007 at 12:41 am

    Jill, it’s best not to overthink comments from Tony.

  256. JM
    April 18, 2007 at 1:17 am

    FB, what are you talking about? You’re making so little sense you could get a job at VT.

    This shooting didn’t happen in a private home or in the street or in an off campus apartment.

    It happened on-campus.

    If it had happened in a courthouse or a public school (or hell, even in a mall), then even if they had a suspect, the place would have been shut down and they would have made absolute 100% certain that everything was okay and the shooter had been caught and there weren’t any other armed persons on the loose. Because government buildings and schools are responsibile for ensuring public safety and can’t take stupid, unecessary chances with the public’s lives. Just like colleges and universities have responsibilities to their students, faculty, and staff to prevent FORSEEABLE consequences.

    Like, say, the consequences of letting a guman roam around campus freely without trying to stop him or do anything to protect the college community.

    The fact that this girl had a boyfriend and he had guns in his house isn’t really good enough evidence to completely drop the ball on the good possibility that there was still a dangerous person on-campus–especially in VA, where gun laws are very lax and there’s a big hunting culture. If she had been killed by a really unusual weapon that’s banned in VA and he had it, maybe, but even there not nearly enough evidence to take such a chance with the entire campus population. It’s insane.

    Evidence would be something like finding a signed note with the boy’s name on it saying I hate her and I did it, and even then, anyone with half a brain would start evacuating and posting guards at all the buildings just to be safe.

    Yeah, a girl was killed, but as you so charmingly pointed out, so was a guy. Even if it’s somehow a given, which it isn’t, that girls can only be killed by their boyfriends, how do they know the target wasn’t the guy, and the girl just happened to get in his way, or the killer knew the guy’s helpfulness MO and decided to get in some random girl’s face to smoke out the guy and get him out of the building? How do they know that the whole thing wasn’t a case of mistaken identity with the killer on his way to his actual target, or that the killer had another target and shot both initial victims because they wouldn’t tell him where to find the real target? How do they know the gunman doesn’t have an equally maladjusted couple of buddies who are killing people elsewhere while all the attention is drawn to the dorm? How do they know that the whole thing isn’t a completely random case of a lunatic going around shooting people indiscriminately?

    Yeah, see, they kind of don’t. That’s the problem with taking ridiculous chances with public safety. You don’t know anything except somebody with a gun came on to your campus, you have two dead bodies, and you don’t have the shooter. A few cops questioning and containing a potential suspect while everybody else locksdown the campus, makes sure everyone else is safe and makes sure there are no other shooters, would be reasonable. But neglecting to do anything beyond “knows one victim, has a gun, no, not here but in an off campus townhouse with the 9 million other guns in town, CASE CLOSED, we have no real reason to presume that this is the guy, but can you prove it isn’t”? Not so much. When somebody’s already opened fire outside in a public space on an open campus, you need to be damn sure you’re right or the potential consequences aren’t that hard to envision.

    It’s not about hindsight so much as about not being a complete and total moron. Doing everything in your power to prevent an easily forseeable tragedy. I don’t know any psychics, but I do know hundreds of people whose first reaction was, “did they just say he killed people in a dorm AND a classroom? How is that even possible? How could he kill people in two different buildings?”

    “Um, it must be one of the dorms that has classrooms in it. There’s no way he could have killed people in two different locations with the campus secured and cops posted everywhere after the first shootings. Well, maybe he managed to kill one cop outside before all the other cops closed in on him.”

  257. April 18, 2007 at 1:32 am

    Just thought ya’ll should check out this media article

    “THIS is the face of the girl who may have sparked the worst school shooting in US history.”

    I cannot believe anyone in the the media would run with this. Oh, wait. Yes I can.

  258. Donna Darko
    April 18, 2007 at 2:00 am

    FB, many news outlets are now saying he stalked women. They’re saying the school wasn’t on lock down because they were two weeks to the end of the semester. Parents are calling for the firing of the college president and police chief.

  259. April 18, 2007 at 6:28 am

    Excellent point, but I’m not sure permeate is the right characterization. I think I would go further and say that misogyny is the root cause of these specific shootings. As of this morning they are reporting that women were mentioned in the shooter’s note, but that is all they are doing, mentioning it as if it were just a sidebar. Once we know the exact language, I think we need to make a major stink about the media trivializing this point.

Comments are closed.