Dear World....
Stop acting like you aren't fascinated by Cho Seung Hui's wacked-out homemade video.
News stations, stop acting like you're restricting broadcasting it for any reason other than the fact that people are canceling interviews.
Honestly, just upload all the videos on a website somewhere, and then tell people that if they want to view them, they can visit the site. That way the families of the victims (and other people who aren't shameless) can avoid seeing the videos. I mean, I'm morbidly curious. And people who are asking, "What kind of person does this?" Well, Seung Hui has provided us with some excellent evidence of the demons that had taken him over.
I remember that they interviewed somebody (I can't remember who, I think maybe he had a friend in the attack, ... gosh like I can remember, they're always interviewing someone different), a couple of days ago, and he said that he forgave the killer. The interviewer seemed sort of shocked (this was, mind you, only a day after the shootings) and asked him why. The student replied that while the murders were horrific, whatever had made the killer do what he did must have been horrific, that something terrible must have happened to him to make him act out like that.
I agree. (I don't really think that something ACTUALLY happened, but something snapped in his head).
More than anything, I'm asking the question of why someone who had a judge declare them mentally ill was able to buy a handgun. Sources are saying that because he wasn't involuntarily committed (and after that evaluation, they released him -- back in December 2005 --), then it didn't show up on his background checks. But come on. You shouldn't need to have been put in the straitjacket (so to speak) for "mentally ill" to come up on your background check when you are purchasing a deadly weapon. I know lots of people who are clinically depressed, bipolar, of course ADHD, and who have forms of autism (which Cho was supposedly diagnosed with). None of the people I know, to my knowledge, have been declared by a JUDGE to be a danger to themselves. That should have prevented him from buying a weapon like that.
And in Cho's case, if he had been prevented from getting the weapon himself, in person (I know he bought one of them online, but even then he had to have it shipped to a dealer who had him undergo a background check and some paperwork before he could possess it), because his background check red-flagged, would he have been able to get the weapons? People say that those who want to kill and get guns will get them, no matter what the laws or restrictions are. But Cho didn't have any real friends (by all accounts). Even his roommates barely knew him. They didn't know about his interest in guns. They were creeped out by him anyway -- it's doubtful that they would have been, "Oh hey! Sure, I'll pick up a couple of handguns for ya! It's just what a stalker like you needs!" Although we don't know much about his family, it's doubtful that they would have procured weapons for him. Cho had no history of criminal behavior (other than the stalking, but in both cases no charges were filed and his behavior was said to be more "annoying" than "creepy"). He didn't have ties to the black market or the mob. Unless he had a relative or friend who had a gun and then he stole it from them, then he would not have been able to get the weapon.
Sure, other weapons besides guns can be used. But the carnage would not have been as great. No one's mentioned him as being involved in athletic / physical activity or martial arts; sure he can hold a knife to his neck in those pictures, but would he be any good at using it? He was "methodical" and "thorough" when he did his killing, but he was shooting a lot of bullets in an enclosed space. He chained the doors to the building. He shot through a door. This was not a guy who was an great shot. He wasn't shooting sniper-style or from a great distance.
All that said, the demons in his head must have been horrible.
News stations, stop acting like you're restricting broadcasting it for any reason other than the fact that people are canceling interviews.
Honestly, just upload all the videos on a website somewhere, and then tell people that if they want to view them, they can visit the site. That way the families of the victims (and other people who aren't shameless) can avoid seeing the videos. I mean, I'm morbidly curious. And people who are asking, "What kind of person does this?" Well, Seung Hui has provided us with some excellent evidence of the demons that had taken him over.
I remember that they interviewed somebody (I can't remember who, I think maybe he had a friend in the attack, ... gosh like I can remember, they're always interviewing someone different), a couple of days ago, and he said that he forgave the killer. The interviewer seemed sort of shocked (this was, mind you, only a day after the shootings) and asked him why. The student replied that while the murders were horrific, whatever had made the killer do what he did must have been horrific, that something terrible must have happened to him to make him act out like that.
I agree. (I don't really think that something ACTUALLY happened, but something snapped in his head).
More than anything, I'm asking the question of why someone who had a judge declare them mentally ill was able to buy a handgun. Sources are saying that because he wasn't involuntarily committed (and after that evaluation, they released him -- back in December 2005 --), then it didn't show up on his background checks. But come on. You shouldn't need to have been put in the straitjacket (so to speak) for "mentally ill" to come up on your background check when you are purchasing a deadly weapon. I know lots of people who are clinically depressed, bipolar, of course ADHD, and who have forms of autism (which Cho was supposedly diagnosed with). None of the people I know, to my knowledge, have been declared by a JUDGE to be a danger to themselves. That should have prevented him from buying a weapon like that.
And in Cho's case, if he had been prevented from getting the weapon himself, in person (I know he bought one of them online, but even then he had to have it shipped to a dealer who had him undergo a background check and some paperwork before he could possess it), because his background check red-flagged, would he have been able to get the weapons? People say that those who want to kill and get guns will get them, no matter what the laws or restrictions are. But Cho didn't have any real friends (by all accounts). Even his roommates barely knew him. They didn't know about his interest in guns. They were creeped out by him anyway -- it's doubtful that they would have been, "Oh hey! Sure, I'll pick up a couple of handguns for ya! It's just what a stalker like you needs!" Although we don't know much about his family, it's doubtful that they would have procured weapons for him. Cho had no history of criminal behavior (other than the stalking, but in both cases no charges were filed and his behavior was said to be more "annoying" than "creepy"). He didn't have ties to the black market or the mob. Unless he had a relative or friend who had a gun and then he stole it from them, then he would not have been able to get the weapon.
Sure, other weapons besides guns can be used. But the carnage would not have been as great. No one's mentioned him as being involved in athletic / physical activity or martial arts; sure he can hold a knife to his neck in those pictures, but would he be any good at using it? He was "methodical" and "thorough" when he did his killing, but he was shooting a lot of bullets in an enclosed space. He chained the doors to the building. He shot through a door. This was not a guy who was an great shot. He wasn't shooting sniper-style or from a great distance.
All that said, the demons in his head must have been horrible.