Virginia Tech
teThe shootings at Virginia Tech occured four weeks ago and left 32 people dead. It has been declared the deadliest shooting by an individual in U.S. history. They held the commencement at Virginia Tech yesterday, and that's the top story across the nation today, but it will soon be gone again. Public discussion of this tragedy seems to have stopped. Few want to engage the really tough questions of gun control or mental health that the tragedy rubbed in the nation's weeping face. I think the nation as a whole has a fatalistic resignation about all this -- it can and will happen again, so what's a body politic to do?
In the days following the shooting, college students across the country expressed sympathy and shared feelings on the social network Facebook. Most colleges have groups on the site for comment postings by their students, and many groups adorned their sites with images of a black ribbon, the VT logo, and their school’s symbol as well. The banner on the site read, “Today we are all Hokies.” That lasted a couple of weeks before the schools returned to images of their mascot or a scenic view of a quad. Approaching the one-month anniversary of the attack, the banners have pretty much disappeared. With such an immense tragedy it feels a bit quick to have moved on already.
A student from an Ivy League college asked his fellow classmates: “When can we take down the Hokies banner?" He said he was “tired of being all depressed” and thought it was “about time to be positive.” The banner was gone by the end of the day.
The news media has pretty much pulled out of the story, except for a return to the scene for Friday's commencement.
Gun control? The first debates for the 2008 presidential candidates touched on the issue, citing the event at Virginia Tech, but it was an aside. Count on this: Most candidates, even the alleged liberal ones, will avoid this issue unless pressed about it.
The International Herald Tribune noted:
"The tragedy of America's runaway gun culture can only deepen now that it's clear the new Democratic Congress operates in fear of the gun lobby's well-practiced demagoguery and rich campaign treasury. A collective silence descended on the Capitol after the pro forma expressions of outrage over the Virginia Tech gun massacre."
Here's a comment from one of the few pols who have continued to speak up on gun control in the wake of Virginia Tech, Rep. Jim Moran, congressman from Virginia's 8th District:
"The Assault Weapons Ban, for instance, was allowed to expire in 2004 by President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress. Had that law been in effect, the Virginia Tech shooter would not have been allowed to purchase high capacity ammunition clips giving him the ability to discharge bullets rapid-fire without reloading. Another measure that could be implemented would be to strengthen the instant background check system to prevent someone mentally or emotionally disturbed who had been temporarily institutionalized from purchasing a handgun. Sadly, these measures — which I believe if you took a survey a large majority of the public would support — are unlikely to pass the Virginia General Assembly, Congress or gain active support from the White House. Why, you might ask? Because the National Rifle Association has a vice grip on these legislative bodies and too many lawmakers are all too willing to do its bidding."
It’s not pleasant dealing with tragedy and the complex questions this one raises. We’ve had some time to take a breath and dry our eyes, but the issues from Virginia Tech need to be revisited and resolved, particularly in the context of the next presidency. That only happens if the rest of us speak up and press the pols.


Comments
Yea but the problem that liberals like Jim Moran seem to forget is that people who are planning to kill people WILL find a way to do it, regardless of whether or not they can purchase high capacity ammunition clips. Even if the killer did not have as much ammunition as he did, he still was going to kill people that day. So I guess if he had only managed to kill 13 people instead of 32, everything would have been ok with the world??? Are we supposed to believe that if Cho didn't have the ability to purchase high capacity ammo, he would have decided not to have gone through with the killings??? Give me a break Jim Moran!!!!
Posted by: Steve | May 12, 2007 11:43 AM
Based on Steve's insightful math, I suspect that 19 families would like to have that choice to have their children sitting with them this Mother's Day weekend instead of in the ground. But God forbid we impinge on anyone's right to own a weapon. That would really be sad.
I love the "they'll kill anyway" logic, as if Cho would have stabbed 32 people to death. Beautiful.
Posted by: Fred | May 13, 2007 8:13 PM