Virgina Tech Fined for Shooting

[Deadbolt]

Hah.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/29/virginia-tech-fined-for-failure-to-provide-timely-warning-during-shooting-rampage/?hpt=T2

Virginia Tech will be fined $55,000 for waiting too long to provide timely warnings about a shooter on the loose during a 2007 rampage that killed 32 people, the U.S. Department of Education said Tuesday.

A report released last year on the incident found the school in violation of The Clery Act, which requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crimes on or near their campuses.

[PsychGuy274]

Interesting

[Scratch705]

$55,000? that is probably the cost of tuition for just a handful of students. that is nothing.

[stix213]

$1700 per dead individual? They lost more just in lost tuition. This is ridiculous.

What they really should be fined for is everything they have for banning CCW firearms and touting it as some kind of safety win right before their students get massacred cause no one was allowed to shoot back.

Here's an interesting story with quotes from the school and officials, written about someone busted for having a licensed CCW firearm on campus. Story was over a year before the blood bath brought on by this very policy.

http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/wb/xp-21770

"I think it's fair to say that we believe guns don't belong in the classroom," Hincker said. "In an academic environment, we believe you should be free from fear."

Virginia Tech also has the backing of the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police. In a policy position paper dated April 1, association executive director Dana Schrad wrote that the presence of guns on college campuses "adds a dangerous element to an environment in which alcohol is a compounding factor." Students should not have to be concerned about guns on campus, Schrad wrote.

Since you know how the story actually ends, all those fools at the school come off in a different light.

[repubconserv]

The govt is the one who should get sued (like it would ever happen )

They are the idiots who created the "gun free zones" (how is that working out anyways? last I heard banks were still being robbed at gunpoint, and there are still crazed shooters going into schools)

[Dion]

You guys are totally missing the true responsible party: THE PARENTS. They should've taken him out of society and into a facility.

For shame.

[rugershooter]

You guys are totally missing the true responsible party: THE PARENTS. They should've taken him out of society and into a facility.

For shame.

Wasn't he over 18?

[Dion]

Wasn't he over 18?

Doesn't matter.

I had a brother who was severely mentally ill and my parents still had control over his facility care.

When he was alive, I would visit him in the facility, and it was a shame how many adult mentally ill patients had ZERO family interaction. Before people start making assumptions about his death - he committed suicide.

At the facilities, when these people were "clear", some would say, "Hey man... you here to visit your brother? That's cool... I wish my brother would come to visit me..."

I'm sorry, but the parents knew something wasn't right with their child when he was young. It was ignored, they sent him off to a college, and left him there to stew in his mental illness. The mother, I believe, tried to take him to church to "extract" the demon inside him.

A high-stimulus place like a college campus is a HORRIBLE place for somebody with severe mental illness.

Mental illness is a severe disease that the general public, still, to this day, stuffs away in their back pocket. That is, until a Virginia Tech shooting occurs.

Then everybody wants to blame the school, counselors, church, teachers, etc.

At one point, my brother did become hostile (after the age of 18). Within a few hours my parents had him put into a facility where he could be monitored and safe.

The diffence between my parents and VT shooter's parents? Mine did something about it.

[rugershooter]

OK. I don't know if the parents can do anything without a court order, or some other such authority when the person is an adult.

[Merc1138]

OK. I don't know if the parents can do anything without a court order, or some other such authority when the person is an adult.

I can't imagine it'd be too hard if it were already established when the person was a minor.

[Cbr1000Rider]

Sorry to hear about your brother.
I think many parents may think, "My child could never be some crazy school shooter", no matter what type of non-violent behavior they display. So I wish we could blame the parents but truthfully no one is to blame but the person who did the horrible deed in my opinion.

I wish we could however put some liability on the schools for not allowing any means of self defense for the students/professors. I think colleges should either be held liable like cigarette companies were until they included warnings. The only way the college could NOT be held liable is by including health warnings in their college advertisements/brochures/websites.

Warning: Attending this College increases your chance of death.
Any means of self defense will not be allowed on our campus.
Attend our College at your own risk.

[repubconserv]

I wish we could however put some liability on the schools for not allowing any means of self defense for the students/professors. I think colleges should either be held liable like cigarette companies were until they included warnings. The only way the college could NOT be held liable is by including health warnings in their college advertisements/brochures/websites.

Again, wasn't it the federal govt that created "gun free zones"? The colleges can't be held responsible if the govt was the one who placed the restriction (though if there were no "gun free zones" and colleges just said no guns, and did not provide armed protection... then yes they should be held liable)

[Dion]

I can't imagine it'd be too hard if it were already established when the person was a minor.

The parents need to get conservatorship for the mentally ill person. Once they do this, the ill person can qualify for state-funded mental health facilities.

I am not a lawyer, so please don't take this as gospel.

The organization, NAMI (National Association of the Mentally Ill) has a ton of great information regarding this, and you can also reserach conservatorship laws of CA.

Thanks guys, for your kind words. I was very difficult for my family to go through it and have complete empathy for anybody else going through the same.

[rugershooter]

Again, wasn't it the federal govt that created "gun free zones"? The colleges can't be held responsible if the govt was the one who placed the restriction (though if there were no "gun free zones" and colleges just said no guns, and did not provide armed protection... then yes they should be held liable)

I agree. The federal gov't should be held liable for creating "gun free zones" that essentially ban effective self defense. It seems as is no governmental body can be held liable for such things though. I've heard of sheriff's depts. here in CA that don't issue ccw's on the basis that they don't want the liability of someone misusing the permit and killing people. Nor is the govenment held liable when elderly drivers don't remember how to drive and kill someone. If the government creates a standard- whether it's DL's, ccw's, or an arbitrary decision on where people can and can't exercise their rights- that same government should be held liable damages caused because of their standards.

[jyo]

Always lookin' to blame someone other then the guy who did it! Yeah, mistakes were made, but under extreme pressure that kind of stuff happens---remember "they" said stay in the second tower after the plane hit the first one?