[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: How to Stop the Next Campus Shootings Bring Back the Posse Since there undoubtedly will be a next time, probably in the not so distant future, what useful counsel on preventive measures can we offer students and faculty and campus police forces across America? There have been the usual howls from the anti-gun lobby, but it's all hot air. America is not about to dump the Second Amendment to the US Constitution giving people the right--albeit an increasingly circumscribed one -- to bear arms. A better idea would be for appropriately screened teachers and maybe student monitors to carry weapons. A quarter of a century ago students doing military ROTC training regularly carried rifles around campus. US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia recently recalled regularly traveling on the New York subway system as a student with his rife. Perhaps there should be guns in wall cases, behind glass, at strategic points around campuses, like those fire axes, usually with menacing signs about improper use. Five years ago Peter Odighizuwa a 43 years old Nigerian student killed three faculty members at Appalachian Law School Dean with a semi-automatic handgun, but before he could wreak further carnage two students fetched weapons from their cars, challenged the murderer with guns levelled ,and disarmed him. When the mass murder session began in the engineering building the police cowered behind their cruisers till Cho Seung-Hui finished off the last batch of his 32 victims, then killed himself. Then the police bravely rushed in, started sticking their guns in the faces of the traumatized students, screaming at them to freeze or be shot. Similar timidity was on display in Columbine, where Harris and Klebold killed students in the library over a period of 15 minutes and then committed suicide. The police finally mustered up the nerve to enter the library over two hours later. Years ago campus police were greeted as a welcome alternative to regular cops hassling students and creating trouble.. But now they mostly are regular cops, hassling students, dishing out speeding tickets like the one the Virigina Tech campus police issued Cho. They were good at spotting a car going a few miles over the limit, bad at protecting the campus from a smouldering psychotic. The Virginia Tech terrible massacre should prompt a radical review of the utility of SWAT teams which now infest almost every community in America. Each time there's a hostage taking or a mass murderer on the rampage, one sees the same familiar sight: overweight SWAT men, doubled up under the weight of their costly artillery, lumbering along in their body armor and then hiding behind trees or cars or walls while the killer goes about his business. SWAT teams perform most efficiently when shooting down unarmed street people menacing them with cellphones. The answer is to disband SWAT teams and kindred military units, and return to the idea of voluntary posses or militias: a speedy assembly of citizen volunteers with their own weapons. Such a body at Columbine or Virginia Tech might have saved many lifes. In other words: make the Second Amendment live up to its promise. In 2005 I listened to some earnest ACLU type at a meeting in Garberville, an hour from where I live, deliver a judicious speech about Taser guns--a new toy for the cops, whereb y a person can be zapped with 50,000 volts. The ACLU guy was torn. On the one hand, he reasoned that the Taser -- being purportedly, though not actually non-lethal -- is better than a 12-gauge or high powered rifle. On the other hand, there is the possibility of "improper use". His answer: more regulation. He didn't entertain the actual course of events, namely that Tasers have now been added to the means whereby the police can kill or terrorize people and that regulation will be zero. The left complain about SWAT teams, but doesn't see that the progressives bear a lot of responsibility for their rise. If you confer the task of social invigilation and protection to professional janissaries--cops -- and deny the right of self and social protection to ordinary citizens, you end up with crews of over-armed thugs running amok under official license, terrorizing the disarmed citizens. In the end you have the whole place run by the Army or the federalized National Guard, as is increasingly evident now with the overturning of the Posse Comitatus laws forbidding any role for the military in domestic law enforcement. What should be banned from campuses are not weapons but prescriptions for antidepressants. Eric Harris, co-slayer (with Dylan Klebold) of twelve students and a teacher in the Columbine school shootings in 1999, was on Luvox, a Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor (SSRI) of the same class as Prozac, Zoloft, and Paxil. Initially Harris had been prescribed Zoloft, but told his doctor he was having suicidal and homicidal fantasies. So the doc shifted him to Luvox. 16-year Jeff Weise, who killed 10 schoolmates at Red Lake High School on an Indian Reservation in 2005 was on Prozac. The manufacturer said 4 per cent of children in one of its tests of Luvox developed short-term mania. Other studies of the SSRI anti-depressants have claimed they have a 15 per cent chance of prompting suicidal or homicidal reactions. Cho Seung-Hui was on a prescription drug for his psychological problems. What exactly it was not yet been disclosed, though the likelihood of it being an anti-depressant is high, since doctors on campuses dispense prescriptions for them like confetti. There was plenty of evidence that Cho Seung-Hui was a time bomb waiting to explode. Students refused to take classes with him. His essays so disturbed one of his teachers with their violent ravings that she arranged a secret signal to another professor in case she needed security during her tutorials. It seems he may well have harassed female students and set fire to a dorm earlier this year. Students talked about him as a possible shooter. Three weeks ago there were anonymous threats to bomb the engineering buildings. Come the first two slayings in the dorm and the cops don't raise the alarm or clear the campus. Make laxity in closely supervising and, where necessary, committing visibly psychotic students grounds for termination. More than one teacher felt Cho was scarily nuts. They recommended "counseling", then didn't bother to review the conclusions of the counselors. And now it has emerged that Cho was actually institutionalised as a psychotic and eminent suicide risk in 2005. Yet when he returned to campus the administrators didn't even tip off his room-mate to be on the watch. College administrators live in constant fear of declining students enrollment. At the first sign of trouble and adverse publicity they cover up. So, there's a double killing in the dorm at 7.15am, after which Cho has time to go home, make his final home video, walk to the post office, mail off the video collection to NBC and head off to the engineering building with his guns. The school's first email to students goes out more than two hours later. The ineffable Warren Steger, college president, said later "We can only make decisions based on the information you had on the time. You don't have hours to reflect on it." Two dead bodies, a killer somewhere on campus, and Steger makes his big decision to do nothing. As Lila Rajiva remarked here the other day, don't hire stupid administrators. Learning to be an American: there are many ways, of which the Cho family learned at least two: Cho's sister went to Princeton and now administers Iraq reconstruction money for the State Department: a cog in the mighty wheel of empire. Cho raved that his victims brought it on themselves, and richly deserved fire and brimstone. There are no innocent bystanders who should be spared. In practical terms this is the imperative of Empire too, as we see every day in Iraq. Anti-Depressants and Killers--A Sampler Eric Harris was on Luvox and Jeff Wiese was on Prozac. Kip Kinkle (Oregon), on methylphenidate and Prozac, killed four people, including his own parents, and wounded at least 22 others. Luke Woodham (Mississippi), on an SSRI, killed three people, including his mother, and wounded at least six others. Jason Hoffman (California), while taking the antidepressants Celexa and Effexor, shot and wounded four students and two teachers. He later committed suicide while incarcerated. Cory Baadsgaard (Washington). On Effexor, he held 23 classmates and a teacher hostage with a rifle. Elizabeth Bush (Pennsylvania). She blasted away at fellow students, wounding one. She was on an antidepressant. T.J. Solomon (Georgia). He wounded six classmates. He was on antidepressants. Shawn Cooper (Idaho). He fired two shotgun rounds in his school, narrowly missing human targets. He was on antidepressants. Jeremy Strohmeyer (Nevada). He raped and killed a 7-year-old in a ladies' room. He was on Dexedrine. Michael Carneal (Kentucky). He killed three students and wounded five others. He was on Ritalin.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
#4. To: Ada (#0)
I haven't heard the howls. I've heard the pro-gun lobby squealing like stuck pigs, but I haven't really heard the anti-gun lobby saying much. I'm pro gun, myself, but this has the sound of pre-empitve hysteria to me.
It could be that, aside from a few people who are obviously blithering idiots, the anti-gun lobby woke up to realize they create their own problems. The pro-gun lobby, on the other hand, is used to seeing well-financed and extremely vocal activists descend like locusts after every incident. It is the 'usual' behavior and it is what the pro-gun lobby has become used to and has based their 'response' around. The silence of the anti-gun lobby after this could quite possibly signal that they are waking up to reality. If that is the case, perhaps there is hope for rolling back a little bit of the collectivism and re-empowering individuals. What say you?
#8. To: mirage (#6)
What say you? Frankly I found the pro-gun lobby's opportunistic jumping on this story to promote their position a bit disgusting. I would have found the anti-gun people doing the same thing equally disgusting. Here we have a horror show unfolding for 33 families and countless others impacted by the grisly murders of a bunch of kids, and no one can even wait for the bodies to get cold before jumping on it. I don't really care what impact these murders have on the RKBA. I'd prefer it if they have no impact whatsoever. I think the 24 hour news cycle has done a pretty good job of disrespecting the dead here, from the commentators who said they should have put up more of a fight to the folks who say they should have been armed to the folks who chide Virginia for having "too lax" gun laws with "loopholes". This is barely to mention NBC's airing of the killer's home- produced babble-videos themselves. Talk about no ethics at all! I think we should have taken at least a moment to greive as a people for the murder of these children. And I know they were 17-21 years old or whatever, but when you've lived 4 decades you recognize that they were just children. Kids. And for the Rambo-watchers who think they'd have done better facing an armed man holding two semi-automatic pistols, the Texas Rangers, way back in the 1800s, put loads of single-shot armed bandidos to death or on the run or under arrest through the withering effect of rapid fire pistols. So I guess I just feel sad that this is what we're reduced to. Turning every event into an "issues" sideshow. I think we kind of blew off the real story here, that so many bright lights were snuffed out by this psycho.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||