 |
| Pace horses |
The parents of two Virginia Tech students killed in a 2007 campus massacre worked for years to prove university officials were negligent for waiting to warn students of a gunman on campus, and a jury agreed with them on Wednesday.
. . .
The parents' lawsuit argued that lives could have been spared if school officials had moved more quickly to alert the campus after the first two victims were shot in a dorm. The massacre ended later in the morning with the deaths 31 more people, including the gunman, at a classroom building.
. . .
During the trial, the attorneys for the Prydes and Petersons portrayed campus police as leaping to the conclusion that the first two victims were shot by a jealous boyfriend, and that the gunman was not a threat to others.
They presented evidence that campus leaders, including Steger, heeded the police conclusion without question, then waited 2 1/2 hours before sending a campus-wide warning that a "shooting incident" had occurred. It did not say a gunman was still at large.
. . .
A state panel that investigated the shootings concluded that officials erred in not sending an alert earlier. The lag in issuing a campus warning also brought Virginia Tech a $55,000 fine from the U.S. Education Department, which the school is appealing….
17 comments:
What does a horse have to do with shooting?
8:54, the horse head is an allusion to recent disturbing episodes at IVC (See). Though they were disturbing, no actual threat of violence was involved. However, there have been episodes in recent memory in which the potential for violence was arguably much greater, and faculty (et al.) have complained that the college does not have adequate policies and routines for such episodes. That remains true, it seems.
No threat of violence? Running around looking for instructors wielding scissors sounds like a threat of violence to me. I hope that student was arrested and put into a mental hospital. What does he have against new hires?
2:10, I agree, that's why I said that "there have been episodes in recent memory in which the potential for violence was arguably much greater." That was a reference to the "scissors" episode, which was more than a year ago (i.e., not recent). The recent episodes were the "horse head" episodes (more than one classroom), and it's pretty clear by now (no thanks to the cops) that those kids did not have violence in mind. But, again, there's no way for the instructor to know that when strangers enter the room, behave strangely, and refuse to answer questions or leave.
If I was taking courses at a school I’d like to know if the person sitting next to has a history of violent behavior. It is irresponsible of administration to not tell people about these kinds of dangers. Your school still allows this person to attend?
Last I heard, the "scissors" student is not permitted on campus.
Not this subject again. Explain to me how a student wielding scissors manages to alarm people all semester in late 2010, cause problems for new hires in 2011, is then not permitted on campus in 2012. What is so hard about admitting it was just a rumor?
8:19, I was somewhat close to the “action” in late 2010, and I assure you that a very real threat or danger hung over at least one instructor and the failure (initially) of administration to respond coherently and effectively was disturbing. Please note that I just identified two things that were/are disturbing: the actions of a student and the “response” to those actions by administration. Yes, a student said and did things that any reasonable person would consider threatening, and that threat was focused on especially one instructor. Eventually, a concerted effort was made to keep that student away, but it was hampered, frankly, by the student’s legal rights (qua person, not student).
I don’t know what you mean by “problems caused for new hires.” A certain person targeted by the disturbed student was a junior member of faculty and, when administration did so badly in response to what student X was doing (I recall saying that they left an instructor twisting slowly in the wind), some of us were concerned that the instructor might quit, something we definitely hoped to avoid.
I have no idea what you mean by saying that “it” was a rumor. If by “it,” you mean a set of distinctly worrisome actions by a disturbed student, that was certainly no rumor.
One more thing: if you are going to be accusatory, 8:19, at least sign your name to your accusations. It amazes me how the biggest accusers on this blog are people who invariably hide behind anonymity, while others stand before them, saying what needs to be said, with their identity manifest.
Coward.
I just believe there are two sides to every story. I've never heard the students side. Did the instructor quit/ take some time off?
Why do you mar my blog with your inane comments and questions? The instructor did not quit, did not take time off. The instructor appears to be just fine.
You, and evidently some others, need to get it through your thick skulls that a certain percentage of the population is mentally ill, and that means that one inevitably encounters mentally disturbed students, and a small percentage of those is violent, or potentially so. It ain't rocket science. You're a kid, right? You're not ready for prime time. You need to learn how to be reasonable and when and how to say things.
The information is puzzling me. The focus of the alleged threats is a junior member of faculty and still employed at IVC. Is that correct?
Is the focus of the alleged threats toward an English instructor in A200 buildings, or is the English instructor a part of the other faculty in the student’s oddly hostile and inappropriate sentiments?
I am thinking that nobody really knew who he was – they were just guesses based unofficial info, emails and gossip. Was the scissors rumor an effort by faculty to compel administration to reveal the identity of this person perceived as a threat? (I say perceived because you did say in other comments that he was not violent but suggested that his disruption was being manipulative somehow.)
According to your argument the probabilities of encountering a mentally disturbed student are low. In other words a fraction of a fraction. In this small percentage you state concerns about a “potentially violent” mentally disturbed student. But isn’t a reasonable fear probabilities of a “violent” mentally disturbed student? What is the main concern? Potentially violent or violent? Because according to you the potential to meet a nonviolent one is low. But the real issue, a “violent” mentally disturbed student, but you never mention in your assumptions. Your fears of harm are unfounded.
Is this you being “reasonable?” Do you fear odds of almost getting struck by lightning too?
12:31, you write: “According to your argument the probabilities of encountering a mentally disturbed student are low….”
Actually, no, I said the opposite: “a certain percentage of the population is mentally ill, and that means that one inevitably encounters mentally disturbed students….”
So, again, do the math. IVC has over 10,000 students. If the rate of “mental illness” were, say, 5%, then one might expect about 500 mentally ill students. I went on to say that a small percentage of those students is violent. Let’s say that 5% of mentally ill students has a history of violence. We would then expect about 25 students who are mentally ill and have a history of violence.
Frankly, your sentences are so badly written that I simply can’t follow your reasoning to the conclusion that there is no risk of violence from disturbed students. Insofar as I can follow it, it is mere sophistry.
LoL. I made you teach. Thx for explaining how there is a high probability of winning the lotto.
In the U.S. there is about a murder every minute. According to what your saying, I should live every minute of my life in fear of being murdered.
It was in your last post that I found it in my heart to forgive you. I see now that you did not know better.
Take care.
Good Lord! The trolls, the trolls....
Mr. Scissors,
If you happen to read this, I recommend finishing up your studies at IVC as soon as possible. Last year I heard a couple of your previous instructors positioned their classes near a class you were going to take. They were supposedly going to make a claim that you said or did something. Be on guard! Best of luck to you.
Post a Comment