Regarding the Cho Seung-Hui murder-suicide, Virginia Tech bears some responsibility in it happening.
IMHO Cho killed 32 people because he had lost face by December 2005 due to two incidents of harrassment reported to VTech but not aggressively pursued.
His QuestionMark persona of 2006 demonstrates this loss of face.
It signalled that Cho was spiralling out of control.
Yet the President of Virginia Tech was slow to act. He now denies Cho's action was in any way influenced by what Virginia Tech may not have done.
We cannot blame the two women not to pursue charges against Cho, for they feared being stalked further by him.
Thus, this tragedy emphasizes that individual psychopaths are the cause of the tragedy at any college murder-suicide, not the inaction of presumably good people.
And this in itself is as evil as shooting 32 people dead.
What could have worked in this case was to graduate the guy, give him a degree in English, and bid him farewell.
Instead, the President ignored the obvious fact that Cho was rapidly deteriorating, and left counselling up to a man who walked out of a psychward back in early 2006, a man who went on to call himself QuestionMark.
Thus Virginia Tech is partially culpable for the deaths of all 33 students through its inaction.
Just agreeing to a student policy isn't enough. Written contracts with the offending student, and constant monitoring, is advised.
This makes me wonder about all his roommates. Why weren't his roomies this term more vigilante?
No comments:
Post a Comment