Queens Tribune

We initially wrote about the massacre at Virginia Tech singaling out weaknesses in the mental health system and the gun laws of Virginia as contributing factors which enabled the killer to remain at the college for years and, finally, to turn his vicious fantasy into tragic reality.

We now know that Cho was seriously mentally ill, not secretly or behind a facade of normalcy, but openly and blatantly, visibly demonstrating his impairment by his withdrawn behavior, his refusal to talk to other students, his total lack of affect, and the violent and threatening written work that he submitted in class. He seems to have made little effort, if any, to conceal his emotional disorder. He stalked women and was caught at it.

Cho was a textbook case of mental illness, and the pathetic shrinks at Virginia Tech thought he was no danger to anyone. Maybe they just didn’t want to fill out the forms or risk a lawsuit or embarrass themselves or each other. Maybe they can’t tell mental illness if it stares them in the face. Now, they are in for at least 80 lawsuits from the parents of the dead and the injured survivors, which are likely to be consolidated. We don’t like lawsuits, but some people deserve to pay for their stupid mistakes, especially if their ignorance or sloth caused the death of innocents. The guilty should be required to pay personally, not have their bills paid by the university they so poorly served.

We are curious to know what Cho could have done to show these bumblers that he was dangerous. Of course, no one knows for certain how any individual case will turn out. But when there is a risk to others as the result of the conduct of someone who is clearly and obviously mentally ill, these officials should recognize their responsibility to the young people they are hired to protect, as well as the ‘patient’ who was smart enough not to waste his time talking to them. What behavior would have concerned them? Not the writings, not the silence, not the stalking? Cho is dead; he will now be spared their ministrations. But what about the 32 faculty members and students that he murdered. Are they to be considered collateral damage, the necessary cost of the psychiatrists’ (if they had that training) delusive belief that no one should be institutionalized without his consent unless he is stark, raving mad. Did they care about evidence presented by responsible faculty members? The governor of Virginia’s investigation should examine their notes and look into their fitness to practice their profession.

The incredibly lax gun laws of Virginia have a major share of responsibility for the tragedy. Sure, if Cho had been determined to kill he could have found guns elsewhere, but selling instruments of death in a pawnshop across the street certainly facilitated the crime. The gun laws, however, among the weakest in the nation, appear impervious to change. Some people believe that if the students were also armed, they could have stopped the intruder. We know from experience that the wide availability of guns creates rather than reduces opportunities for murder. Unfortunately, that belief is not shared by many people and their legislators. We can focus our anger on the National Rifle Association, which may be the most malignant of lobbies, but they reach people by preaching the mantra of self-protection, which is not an outrageous proposition in today’s world. After all, we don’t see the United States unilaterally disarming, do we?

Not-so-bright cops and timid university administrators are a problem everywhere. While locking down the entire campus might have been the preferable solution after the outbreak of terror at 7 a.m., these guys didn’t even patrol the buildings. Who guarded Norris Hall? Who was nearby when Cho chained the doors shut. We know the killer spent the two hours between his murders on a trip to the post office to send his hideous screeds to NBC by express mail. This gives a new meaning to the phrase ‘going postal’.

What did Charles Steger, the university president, and Wendell Flinchum, his home-grown police chief, who had spent his entire professional life as a campus cop, do during the two hours of grace they received? Did they call for reinforcements? Did they call on State Troopers to protect the students or to capture the killer? Did they warn the students by e-mail after the first murders that a killer was loose. They knew two people had already been slain by an unknown killer. How much time did they consume giving an innocent boy the third degree? Even if they thought young Thornhill might be guilty, didn’t they have an obligation to search the campus for a possible murderer. How long did it take them to find out the poor kid didn’t do it? Was it only the sound of gunshots in Norris that rattled their brains?

Were the college officials more interested in protecting the reputation of Virginia Tech than protecting the lives of its students? Very often the cover-up is more damaging than the crime. If they had simply sounded the alarm, the results could have been quite different. The series of unfortunate events clearly requires the departure of President Steger and Chief Flinchum, if only to assure parents that their children’s lives receive a higher priority than their school’s reputation. The question is whether the denouement will come rapidly, or whether the pair will be left to twist in the wind during the inevitable intensive investigation. Who knows, maybe the ol’ boys network will get them off.

This discussion of the ineptitude of college officials should not detract from the major issue of gun control. There should be strict Federal regulation of interstate traffic in guns. There should be stricter requirements before firearms can be purchased. The laws against trafficking, gun running and smuggling should be enforced strictly. We need more public officials who share the intensity of Mayor Bloomberg’s feelings on this issue.

Unfortunately, we are not likely to see radical reform in this area any time soon. Gun-owning is part of the American culture, but so was cigarette smoking, now in decline.

“If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” is superficially credible. There are so many other important issues that Southern and Western Democrats are not ready to jeopardize their Congressional or Senate seats by getting tough on gun owners.

“Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” Why don’t the anti-gun forces think up some powerful slogans, and see if they can persuade Americans to support their position?

But although it may be the price of democracy to give people access to weapons, we are not obligated to put up with incompetent public officials or security personnel, whether in medicine or law enforcement. So as we wade through the debris at Blacksburg, and the families bury of their beloved youngsters, we should work at what, if anything, we can do to prevent or mitigate similar tragedies.

The conclusions we draw are relatively simple:

·Diseased minds plus easy access to guns equals mass murder.

·Inept police, fuzzy psychiatrists and frightened administrators make things worse.

·There will always be some crazy people. That is why we build mental hospitals.

·They may not help the inmates that much, but they do safeguard the rest of us.

·If there is uncertainty, public safety deserves more importance than it receives.

We do not know how to deal effectively with real terrorists if an entire university police force cannot prevent one man with a gun from serially killing 32 students and faculty. More training is urgently needed.

Starquest@NYCivic.org