Watching the news and as expected (and quite predictable) he had some form of treatment in December 2005. As per usual the media are harping on about..ooh why wasn't something done, why was he not expelled etc.

It's the same thing time and again in these cases, you can't lock people up or expell them for things they haven't done or MIGHT do in the future. No one has a crystal ball nor can somebodys future behaviour be anticipated.

1 in 3 people will experince some form of mental health issue in their lifetime, probably 95% of these have not or will not involve a past,present or future crime or potential act of crime.

In regards this person, clearly based on what i have read thus far there were no clear signals he had any violent intent, "low level harrasement" does not make for a serial killer.

My point is, i doubt the authorities could have anticipated the events of Monday and i also suspect that the person responsible never gave clear indications he was going to shoot 33 people dead.

If they started locking up people for what they might do the half the population would be locked up.

It's the usual routine of the media looking to blame someone, the shooter is dead so that's a no go, i'm sure people will have enough time to evaluate with hindsight if something more could have ben done to prevent this or that.

But human nature is inherently unpredicatble and if someone wants to kill 33 people they will find a way.

The sad thing in all this is why he didn't get the help he so clearly needed.
All healthcare and mental healthcare in particular is not valued in this country.

It's a shame. A damn shame.

liberation said:

If guns are readily available, then yes, they will

i hate that all the reports on this guy are coming out as "he was a loner, he didn't talk to people."

i'm a fucking loner and i don't talk unless i have something to say. it doesn't mean i'm a crazed gunman! it just means i grew up with an isolated, only-child upbringing and i'm independent. it's actually something that brings me comfort, not conflict! so on behalf of introverted loners everywhere, QUIT LOOKING AT US LIKE THAT!!!

i think EVERYONE has the potential to snap like this guy did. i think it's easier to dismissively villainize someone who HAS snapped than it is to ask ourselves how close we are to that kind of a meltdown.

The real issue is not that he was "mentally ill" it's what led this kid down that road in the first place.

It looks like it was yet another case of an intelligent but socially awkward, rejected by his peers, probably picked on his whole life guy snapping.

Passing it off as just another 'sicko' or 'weirdo' is the biggest mistake anyone can make.
[Edited 4/18/07 8:40am]

Anx said:

I live by myself (well, there's a bloke called "Dennis" who lives in the loft but I never see him). I enjoy "heavy rock" music. I own several books on Hitler, and "A Catcher in the Rye". I don't intend to murder anyone though.
[Edited 4/18/07 8:41am]

Exactly Anx, i'm sure alot of people can relate to the tried and tested "loner" description...maybe they think to themselves...hold on?...does that make a potential killer also?

But it's human nature to try and understand such acts, it makes us feel better about ourselves if we have an answer...he's mentally ill, a loner etc.
It puts the rest the "why", and as you say...we're all capable if pushed far enough or we just breakdown.

JustErin said:

And as such cases like this will get repeated, and with access to guns....the death count will be that much higher.

A lunatic with a gun can kill alot more then one without.

JustErin said:

Exactly right. Why did he get to that point... what part did the people around play in bringing him to that point... Not saying it's anyone fault, but writing him off as a bad apple that hadn't been found out is just a quick and easy explanation...

To paint someone as "evil" wraps things up nicely for most people, it's the easy way out to explain human behaviour, how he was treated by others and how society walks by these people every day.

Mark Chapman killed Lennon just to be known, to be seen...some people will go to any lengths to get any form of attention.

liberation said:

yeah, i see what you're saying, but they ALWAYS say that about anyone who does something like this. "he was a loner...he kept to himself."

it's like that's become a cliche or a profile for this kind of person, when the truth is, most "loners who keep to themselves" are actually quite thoughtful and gentle.

There is no excuse for what he did, but if to just ignore the reasons and the background and just say he was ´mentally ill´ it would do the 32 others who died a terrible disservice and amidst all the inevitable demands for greater gun control, I think also that there should be greater demands for student services, to ensure they have the capacity to help people like Cho before it is too late, before the madness within becomes a madness without.

JDInteractive said:

I agree, but all the focus is on him now and his mental illness. And that doesnt help the 32 victims and their families..

REDFEATHERS said:

That was partly my point.
[Edited 4/18/07 9:11am]

JDInteractive said:

and I am agreeing..

susannah said:

JustErin said:

I agree with these posts.

JustErin said:

I agree...but, what is a solution to these sorts of problems? Is it teaching children, from a young age, to have more self-esteem and not worry so much about what their peers are saying? Or...is it to teach others more tolerance for those who are different than they are and to see past the shallow?

applekisses said:

It's both.

applekisses said:

Well.... if you took the guns away at least they wouldn't be able to shoot people!

Anx said:

Hey you, stay away from me! I don't want to be around you when you lose it all and go on a rampage! Just kidding. Actually I was in the bookstore this weekend reading a book about handwriting analysis, and they profiled the manuscripts of Timothy McVeigh, the Boston Strangler, and other serial killers throughout the years. While they were able to show that many of them were loners, that didn't mean that all serial killers were anti-social and kept to themselves. They particularly noted on the handwriting of Charles Manson and Ted Bundy, which indicated that they were highly extroverted and loved being around people. In fact, Ted Bundy was considered to be quite sociable and hung out around college campuses, and he was invited to be a member of the Young Republicans club in Gainesville, Florida. And Charles Manson was part of a hippie commune and hung out with Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys, who seriously considered adding him to the group. In fact, Manson would not have been able to get his followers to go on a killing spree if hadn't been so sociable in the first place. And of course, there's O.J. Simpson, who was well-loved by the public prior to the murder of his ex-wife and Ron Goldman.

If you want to know more about handwriting analysis, I believe the name of the author was Michelle Dresbold, and she has a website. I don't remember the web address, but you can Google her name up.

susannah said:

Ya, it would be pretty hard to stab 30 people in the same time it took him to shoot all those he shot.

JustErin said:

I agree with that too. But, those things are so entangled into so many aspects of our society...media, being the most visible and permeating...and thinking about the conversations we've all had here, if this is truly a social cross-section, about what is attractive and why, it raises the question of whether or not it would even be possible to change people's minds to be more tolerant of others.

JustErin said:

Can't decide if you're being sarcastic or not but either way - you're right!



I'm sorry, it just always comes back to that for me. You can argue about the lack of treatment or attention he recieved all you want, but if he couldn't get a gun, he couldn't have shot anyone

I think it's more to do with being aware of the people around you, and how others may be struggling. It's easy to walk by the geeky kid in school...if somebody pushes the kid and he drops his books and everyone laughs...that impacts on him greatly.

On the other hand if a girl walks over and helps pick up his books with a smile that may very well make a huge difference in that persons life...whether people realise it at the time or not.

susannah said:

well said

susannah said:

She wasn't being sarcastic, she just just poiting out you can kill alot more people with a gun then with a knife, one hopes.

applekisses said:

This has nothing to do with what people find attractive or not attractive.

It's about teaching people to treat everyone with decency, respect and understanding. Not everyone has to like everyone, not everyone has to get along but if people would just treat others in this way I think a lot of people wouldn't feel so alone and rejected.

I'm over-simplifying here, I know...but really that's what I think it's all about.

People, in general, treat each other like shit. It makes me sick.

susannah said:

I was being dead serious.

JustErin said:

It does, though...people who are seen as "attractive" by society are treated better than those who are deemed not attractive. There are loads of scientific studies on it out there...and I've seen it here...do you think those photos of obese women and men that are posted here are treated with decency, respect and understanding? Most times, unfortunately, no. I see alot of this ---> and laughing. Why do you think that is?


“A person's physical attractiveness -- the look that they're basically born with -- impacts every individual literally from birth to death,” says Dr. Gordon Patzer, dean of the College of Business Administration at Roosevelt University. He's spent 30 years studying and writing about physical attractiveness. “People are valued more who are higher in physical attractiveness. As distasteful at that might be, that's the reality.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3917414/
[Edited 4/18/07 11:06am]

applekisses said:

You just proved my point.

I said that people in general have no respect for others, it doesn't matter what their reasons are for doing that.

You can't expect people to all like the same things, find all the same things attractive.

What you should expect from people is that no matter what they think of someone else, that person deserves to be treated with respect and decency.