Friday, April 20, 2007

Who Do We Blame?

All of the victims of the April 16, 2007 shooting that took place at Virginia Tech are still in my thoughts and prayers. They will be for quite some time, but. I don't feel that any number of new gun laws will solve this problem. Senseless killings have been taking place since the beginning of time, "Gen.4
[8] And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him." In 1912 eight people (6 were a part of my Mothers Foster Family) were murdered as they slept. If your interested that case is still unsolved. The first homicide to take place in Saint Joseph, Missouri in 2007 was committed with a knife. There's three cases that show firearm's are not needed to commit murder. They might make it quicker/easier, but if the would be murderer is determined/obsessed they are not necessary.

I feel that one of the worst gun laws ever written was the one that created the "GUN FREE ZONE" Talk about creating a safe working environment for murderers, rapist and thieves. How many would be killers are going to walk into a school, work place or shopping center to commit a crime knowing that even a third of their would be victims might be armed? I wonder how many of the legislators that voted for that have a "GUN FREE ZONE" sign out in front of their house? Chances are they are more likely to have an around the clock security team close by (I can't afford that myself) or firearms of their own in the closet. I've heard we might be losing some of these "GUN FREE ZONES". As far as I'm concerned that would be a step in the right direction.

I do agree that there are some people that shouldn't be allowed to own firearms. Felons that show no interest in or an inability to rehabilitate. Yes I do feel a felon can change their ways and if they do their rights should be restored. People that have been treated for a mental illness/disorder in the past or are currently being treated. I know they can go for years with no problems. They can snap at any time, they should never be allowed to own firearms. I just read what Obama had to say about this. I agreed with some of what he had to say. Some I had a problem with, "I'm respectful of people who want to hunt or sportsmen, somebody who might want to have a gun in the house to protect their home. But it's hard to imagine why you would need 19 rounds in a semiautomatic,". Some "sportsmen" might want 19 rounds in that semi-auto just to see if they can hold it on target for all 19 rounds. That might not make sense to some people, climbing a mountain just because it's there never made sense to me. "Federal law prohibits the mentally ill from purchasing guns, but most states have privacy laws barring such information from being shared with law enforcement. Some advocates for the mentally ill and gun-rights groups have opposed legislation in recent years that would include the information in computerized record-keeping". If I'd heard about these privacy laws I'd forgotten about them. This information should be shared with law enforcement and gun stores. Especially if the person might be a threat to their self or others. The article also said, "Cho had been ordered to a psychiatric hospital but was released with orders to undergo outpatient treatment. Virginia is one of the states that provides mental health records, and it's unclear why that didn't stop Cho's purchase." Let me take a guess, someone is not doing their job, getting this information to people that need it.

I heard something else that I agreed with the other day but I can't remember who said it. He said he didn't think an armed student or professor could have saved 32 lives. Then he ask, but wouldn't it be worth it to save just one? I think it would be.

Who would I blame for 32 lost lives? The person or people that didn't get the information to the gun store owner, if I was right about that. Maybe the gun store owner, I'm sure he is being investigated. Most of all, the law makers that have made it impossible for us to defend ourselves and others by creating "GUN FREE ZONES". Maybe all of us should except some of the blame. We're the ones that keep putting them into office.

Thanks Go To:
The Bible
The Washington Times
The Villisca Movie
Yahoo News

God Bless America, God Save The Republic.

2 Comments:

Blogger Elizabeth said...

I agree with you that the gun store owner, or whatever state or federal agency was responsible for the database, or both, are at fault.

I would like to point out that "treated for a mental illness" is too broad. Currently the federal law states that people who've been committed to a mental institution are barred from owning guns (thus, the gun store was clearly in violation for selling the gun to Cho). There is a big difference between the people who come to my office for psychotherapy, many of whom show better judgment than the average person, and someone who was committed against their will to a hospital for being a threat to others or to himself.

5:55 AM  
Blogger Always On Watch Two said...

I blame VA Tech too. My guess is that VT just wanted to graduate Cho and be done with him.

One of my students told me that she heard or read the special academic accommodations were made for Cho. Such accommodations would be unusual at VT, a tough school which requires a "B" average to stay there.

So, why did VT keep Cho enrolled? To dismiss him could have resulted in litigation, as recently happened at GWU with a similar case. However, in the case of GWU, the parents were supervising their child's treatment.

Typically, "problems" with students at one institution are not communicated to another institution--at least, in the public schools systems (unless a violent incident has occurred). Again, the fear of litigation.

Cho's mother knew that something was wrong with her son:

Warning signs about Seung Hui Cho came early in his life.

Cho was unusually quiet as a child, relatives said. He did not respond to greetings. He did not want to be hugged. But when Cho fought with his older sister, he would punch her with shocking violence.

Kim Yang Soon, a great-aunt in Korea, said Cho's mother told her the boy had autism. After the family immigrated to the United States in 1992, when Cho was 8, Kim would call his mother and ask how the boy was doing. "She only talked about her daughter," Kim said. "We knew something was wrong."

Because Cho did well in school, his mother did not seem very determined to get treatment for him, Kim added....

7:29 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home