Placing blame


PDA






Oleg Volk
August 31, 2008, 11:19 PM
http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/25410-2/vt1240.jpg

If you enjoyed reading about "Placing blame" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Duke Junior
August 31, 2008, 11:30 PM
That is very graphic.
Stunning and startling.

RancidSumo
August 31, 2008, 11:36 PM
Good except I would lose the ! at the end.

HardKnox
August 31, 2008, 11:38 PM
I'll say that is certainly a bit more graphic than your usual posters.
Although I agree with your point, I doubt you'll pull even one fence sitter to our side. Maybe if you dropped the "blood on their hands part" and said something like cho might not have killed 32 people if students were awarded the right to self defense", or something similar, more people would be more likely to consider your point instead of associating that poster with more gun nut rightest bs/propaganda.

Oleg Volk
August 31, 2008, 11:44 PM
VT students from campuscarry.org liked it.

I have less graphic versions. This one has to punch harder.

Bill2e
August 31, 2008, 11:47 PM
Oleg, I respect your point & agree. I just think this one is to over the top IMHO.

I think most of the posters play well with us, but I am not sure of the impact they have on the outside.

sm
August 31, 2008, 11:47 PM
Oleg,

I like it, just as it is.

It takes what it takes to reach folks; if one does not upset, shock or totally tick off some folks in doing what they do , then they are not doing their best.

You are doing your best.

Thank you.


Steve

george29
August 31, 2008, 11:55 PM
There was once a succesful show called Scared Straight. Cons taught teens what prison was really like, It was taken off the air because it was too graphic.
The Spin of life.

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l15/avisamuel/vt1240.jpg

Nolo
August 31, 2008, 11:55 PM
Sometimes...
You just gotta be brutal.
It's a psychological slap in the face, and that's what some well-meaning faculty need.

SaxonPig
September 1, 2008, 12:00 AM
This is the Art History/Visual Arts professor speaking (and I know you teach photo, too). IMO the picture is way too graphic for public consumption. The real person and spreading blood will turn off if not outrage the vast majority of viewers. That's the way it is. They don't want to see reality.

Better to have a chalk outline with books scattered about to represent the slain students. No blood. No bodies. That's just too real.

This image will generate charges that we are ghouls. It's too powerful.

az_imuth
September 1, 2008, 12:03 AM
Graphic, but certainly gets the point across. I would like to see you make a similar poster displaying cho on the floor with a message stating the likely outcome had one or more of the VT students been allowed the tools with which to defend themselves.

As a plus, viewers are much less likely to be shocked at the sight of cho's lifeless body.

Mandirigma
September 1, 2008, 12:33 AM
yeah too shocking, I guess 32 murders isn't?

Soybomb
September 1, 2008, 12:42 AM
I dig it. There's a time and a place for subtle and there's a time and a place for provocative and controversial. Use each when most advantageous.

Mrs. Armoredman
September 1, 2008, 12:53 AM
Oleg,

It is graphic it needs to take the blinders off the folks at VT. I would leave it the way it is. That was how it was on the day he took other peoples lives. Keep up the good work.

basicblur
September 1, 2008, 12:53 AM
While I ain't no English major...
Wouldn't it be better to say "The blood is on their hands also" or "The blood is also on their hands"?

sm
September 1, 2008, 12:55 AM
I hope someone with money will put that poster on a bill board near VT.

Seriously.

I was born in the mid 50's and personally have enough of this Dumbing Down of Society.

Sensitivity Training- I have my own suggestion, it is called Reality.

Having worked in the Main OR, I think VT Admins need to spend 32 hours in a ER and OR.

I want them to see not only the victims coming in, having rape kits administered, the surgeries, the deaths, the organ harvests.

I want them in scrubs and right there, and I want them to stand in OR 18 and get the deceased ready for the family to come back and view the deceased.
I want them to there as the organs are harvested.

I am fed up with folks shining a seat with their butts, making policy that consists of "comply", "submit" and "don't resist".

If they cannot handle this, then 32 hours of a shooting facility where they are in settings, where trained persons using force on force and simunitons role play Criminals.

Dammit I want these Admins to have honest to goodness fear, shame, emotional stress and beat fists against the wall.

By golly, enough is enough, let them walk 32 minutes in a bad area of town with a cell phone and rape whistle.

I do not care if folks get upset. Dead is Dead, and Dead is forever.
Injured, and Maimed is Injured and Maimed and it too has everlasting effects on quality of life.

Someone with money , do this Poster on a Bill Board, and oh please, let there be a Bill Board that is viewable from Admins offices at VT.

*spit*

Screw 'em, feed 'em fish heads and rice!

kingpin008
September 1, 2008, 01:09 AM
Agreed. It is graphic, and it is disturbing, but so was the body count left by that freaking psychopath. I say leave it as it is. People can get safe & tame any day of the week - sometimes they're gonna have to be exposed to something a little more realistic. God forbid anyone get their panties in a twist when it comes to opening their eyes to what can happen when people are forced to be a defenseless part of a madman's bodycount.

Oleg Volk
September 1, 2008, 01:15 AM
This poster is now in the hands of VT students. I think their admins would get to see it before long.

sailortoo
September 1, 2008, 01:17 AM
I say go with it, but with the suggested "If only I had a computer to throw", as that seems to "be the answer to self defense" at some colleges now. And sm, why are you so reticent with your feelings? Better to let them out! +1 :D
sailortoo

SomeKid
September 1, 2008, 01:19 AM
I hope they post it on campus. Personally, I like the hard punches. I say punch harder. Maybe find a way to point out VT administrators lobbied AGAINST a bill that would have removed restrictions on students carrying, before the massacre. Ask yourself, what if someone had a gun?

rainbowbob
September 1, 2008, 01:54 AM
Dammit I want these Admins to have honest to goodness fear, shame, emotional stress and beat fists against the wall.

Oleg and SM:
I understand your outrage. I'm sure we all do. But is it so impossible to imagine that the VT administrators are human also? How do we know they haven't had endless sleepless nights blaming themselves for not doing more? Is it possible to consider they even believe in their hearts what they did was right?

Most of us know the mistake of disarming the public in any setting. The fact that many others don't get it does not make them less than human. Nor does it make them murderously culpable for the violence done by insanely violent criminals.

Even if guns were allowed on every college campus in America (and I hope some day they are) - we can't know with any certainty that even one life would have been spared in that incident. The blame for this horror can really only be laid at the grave of Cho - and perhaps the "mental health" system that failed to get him the treatment and oversight he so desperately and obviously needed.

sixgunner455
September 1, 2008, 02:01 AM
It is graphic. It is also real.

Reality bites, sometimes. Doesn't mean that people should be able to continue to put their heads in the sand with impunity.

Sometime, somewhere, somebody has to pull them up, draw a line in that sand, and tell it like it is.





Yeah, I mix metaphors.

SomeKid
September 1, 2008, 02:03 AM
bob, it is impossible to imagine the admin as human. Why? because they are mindless, soulless communistic educrats. Free and rationale thought, love for liberty, respect for other humans, all have been bred and "learned" out of them.

They are to us as sheep are to sheepdogs. Not even the same species.

Tyris
September 1, 2008, 02:07 AM
How do we know they haven't had endless sleepless nights blaming themselves for not doing more?

Two problems with that:

1. liberals generally dont believe in personal responsibility. Why would they of all people feel responsible for Cho? They choose to blame "the gun" first.

2. Their idea of "dong more" is making students even MORE defenseless.


-T

Catherine
September 1, 2008, 02:19 AM
I think that the poster should be left alone. It is NOT too graphic.

It shows what happens when anyone is left without the right to self defense and/or to protect anyone else from a KILLER with FULL INTENT.

The problem in this country is that everyone wants to be so full of political correctness for FEAR of offending anyone else. God forbid that we should tell it like it is - BLUNT and to the POINT - calling a spade a spade!

Words and pictures tell it like it is if you can get them out to the masses. The masses include people with brains/common sense and ones that I would classify as 'sheep'. Sometimes the sheep wake up from their slumber!

It is a good 'poster' - leave it alone. Thank you and keep up the good work.

I deleted my speech before I posted this. It was a long one and since I don't feel like high heels and a soap box at this time of night... I will leave it OFF this post. Lucky you! Grin. Back to the fluffy slippers now.

Catherine

Prince Yamato
September 1, 2008, 02:20 AM
Most of us know the mistake of disarming the public in any setting. The fact that many others don't get it does not make them less than human. Nor does it make them murderously culpable for the violence done by insanely violent criminals.


The thing is, VT wasn't just an unfortunate happening. The campus administrators ACTIVELY petitioned the VA legislature to ban CCW on campus a year before the shooting. So they are culpable in my book and in many other people's books. They let stupid ideology get in the way of common sense. They also didn't rectify the situation afterwords. There's still no CCW on their campuses. When your ideology costs the lives of 32 students and you still don't change your ways, I say the hell the administrators and with their feelings and I hope the have sleepless nights for the rest of their lives as the deaths of 32 students weigh upon their souls.

Catherine
September 1, 2008, 02:23 AM
PS:

Bingo to Prince Y!

Thank you.

Catherine

dogmush
September 1, 2008, 02:23 AM
But is it so impossible to imagine that the VT administrators are human also? How do we know they haven't had endless sleepless nights blaming themselves for not doing more? Is it possible to consider they even believe in their hearts what they did was right?


Bob, I for one definatly think of them as human. Never said otherwise. I'm sure they did believe in their hearts that they were right. An While I don't wish mental anguish on anyone, I would hope for the sake of their humanity that they had a few sleepless nights.

However, ernestness beforehand, and remorse after the fact, while speaking to their worth as people, doesn't absolve them from their responsibility for helping Cho to act.

The fact of the matter is, they (administrators) conciously took away a very important tool for their students and faculty to defend themselves, and then those students got killed. Weather a gun would have saved anyone is moot, they didn't even have the chance to try. And the responsibility for denying them that chance is the administrators.

It's their humanity that proves their responsability.


As far as them poster goes, yes definatlly a little more graphic then most. But if there's a time and place to be shocking and graphic (and there is) the issue of forcably disarmed colleges is it. Those folks are (mostly) adults, and are lined up for slaughter in what is becoming a target of choice for criminals.

physics
September 1, 2008, 02:38 AM
I like it but for one detail. I think using the idiot's name is giving him the glory that he was looking for. Let's remember him not as Cho, but as the VT lunatic.

sm
September 1, 2008, 04:07 AM
Those folks are (mostly) adults, and are lined up for slaughter in what is becoming a target of choice for criminals.

First off,
Catherine, thank you for your post ma'am.


Now, again I am fed up with the Dumbing Down of Society.
It has not been too many years ago folks would show :

-Nazi Germany and pictures of those lined up for slaughter, and the pictures of the dead piled up.

-Vietnam and it graphic Pictures

Now we have a society that says teachers cannot use a Red Pencil to grade papers as it might "offend" a child.
Schools do not allow kids to play "competitive games" as if there is a "winner" there must be a "loser" and we cannot offend the sensibilities of kids if some "loses".

Hey, If Art's Grammaw was not around, I would share in no uncertain terms how I am fed up with this INDOCTRINATION of making wimps out of kids.

If folks want to be controlled, and live under Tyranny in a so called Utopia, then get the Hades out of my country as I am fed up with you breathing MY air.

Leave, get out and the faster the better!

WE have had a society of wimps being raised and continue to have wimps being raised.
America is great because we stood up, men and women, boy and girls and taught folks how we wanted to be treated - that being - were were going to be Free, and continue to be Free.

One teaches one how they want to be treated.

Zero Tolerance in my day, is different from Today.

I was raised to not start a fight, still, if I got in one, I had better end it!

If a Bully comes up and hits a kid, that kid has a Right to punch that Bully in the nose , and he/she gets back up, hit them again.

That is how one teaches a Bully to treat them - not whimpering and running and cowering as that teaches other Bullies how one wants to be treated.

These NO CCW Zones are proven in teaching Criminals how Society wants to be be victims.

I am fed up with Insurance Companies dictating what Schools , Businesses and whomever else does what.
Tyranny will use whatever resource it can, to take away Freedom.

Heck some Police Depts are so "hampered" by Insurance Regs and fear of liability they have "lawyer triggers" on guns and the like.
I got an idea, tell the Insurance company to pound sand, and instead give the cops equipment, including plenty of training , real guns, with plenty of ammo to hit what needs hitting.
Between criminals getting hit when needing hit and jails keeping criminals in jail and killing those that need killing by Capitol Punishment, - we will teach criminals how we want to be treated.

Tort Reform would help a lot too.

Good Grief, no wonder a Cop needs a "hi-cap nine", it takes a Ford 250 in 4wd to trip a trigger on these guns.
Get them old Smiths and Colts with real triggers and they can made quick effective hits.


Evil comes and starts a fight, by golly folks have a Right, to stop evil.
This teaches Evil how society wants to be treated, and that being , they want to be free, and are willing to fight to be free.

The ability to defend is a deterrent.
One does not hear of Evil going to a Police Station and shooting up the joint.

VT Admins need to leave their positions as we do not need those more interested in Politics, Ego, Job Status, Insurance Regs and whatever else, more than folks having the right to defend, in daily activities of living.


That goes for anyone, that denies one their Rights as set forth in COTUS and BoR.

If these folks want Utopia, and Tyranny, again, get the Hades out of my country and move to wherever this Utopia is.

Kids are our future, and is scary and sickening what this Great Society is indoctrinating and brainwashing kids with.

VT is not the only tragedy, there are others, and I feel the same way about the Admins and decision makers that denied the rights of victims there as well.


Like I said, one teaches one how to treat them ,and I do not like The Great Society, teaching folks to be victims.


Yes, for those wondering-
I have been on a campus where there was shootings.

Standing Wolf
September 1, 2008, 04:32 AM
Well done, Oleg.

gallo
September 1, 2008, 05:11 AM
This is a cheap shot. No different than an anti using the tragedy to call for more gun control.

HK G3
September 1, 2008, 05:16 AM
This will be sure to ruffle some feathers.

Definitely agree with the sentiment, but I dunno exactly how well it will be received, or whether it will do anything to convert fence-sitters or just generate more of the "typical gun-nuts" sentiment, especially since it's directly "using" the dead students to make a point. Additionally, implying criminal liability to the administrators, all of whom obviously didn't want 32 dead students under their watch, regardless of whether or not we agree with their philosophy on RKBA, is likely to offend people, and potentially make them dismiss our position on the issue - just like that pathetic Brady Campaign "Die-In" thing that happened this year, which seems to have done more harm than good for their position.

yokel
September 1, 2008, 06:45 AM
The full blood-curdling horror would be brought home by depicting a gore-drenched room full of dead or dying unarmed students.

It should be considered by critics to have higher aspirations, such as social commentary, than to be simply exploitative for its own sake.

Ric in Richmond
September 1, 2008, 07:46 AM
I went to Tech, class of 87.

I agree 100% with Oleg's poster.

Every time the school calls for money I say the same thing.

"The school management needs to admit fault, or be fired and Concealed weapon holders need to be recognized as law abiding citizens and allowed lawful carry before the school gets a dime." (we will cross the OC bridge later!)

I have an employee who was there that spring. She came out typical college kids, afraid of guns. Now she understands the issue and is so angry about the admin disarming the legal carrying CITIZENS for no reason.

Apple a Day
September 1, 2008, 08:07 AM
VT class of '93. I had a former student in that building.

It's too much. The anti's will dig in their heels at that one, calling us bloodthirsty. Families of the dead will look at it and see their kid's face.

The administrators will turn their eyes away. The loved ones of the dead will stare at it. It's a powerful shot but it will hit the wrong target.

lee n. field
September 1, 2008, 08:37 AM
The Blood Is On Their Hands Too

I've taken some heat elsewhere for making the very same point.

cambeul41
September 1, 2008, 08:58 AM
The original is not too graphic. It needs to get the message through.

As to "How do we know they haven't had endless sleepless nights blaming themselves for not doing more?" until the victim disarmament policy is abolished, they need the sleepless nights to give them time to think things through.

hso
September 1, 2008, 09:01 AM
They banned guns on campus, but refused to ban a psychopathic murder.

We see how well that worked out.

Allow carry on campus for CCW holders.

basicblur
September 1, 2008, 09:26 AM
But is it so impossible to imagine that the VT administrators are human also? How do we know they haven't had endless sleepless nights blaming themselves for not doing more?
This brings to mind a quote I once heard: Let's not be so tolerant that we tolerate intolerance.

I know VCDL was actively pushing VT officials to allow CC on campus well before Cho’s attack-they pointed out that by making VT a “gun free zone” administrators were just setting the stage for a predator to pick easy targets. Their warnings did (and continue) to fall on deaf ears.

AFA having sleepless night for not doing more...
exactly what "more" have they done since this tragedy?

Colt46
September 1, 2008, 09:45 AM
Does it make some people uncomfortable? Hopefully VA-Tech's administration will be made to feel 'uncomfortable' knowing that their cowardly policy allowed a predator to kill thirty two people that were disarmed by the actions.

Besides, if an artist doesn't attract a bit of controversy he isn't really that much of an artist.

JKimball
September 1, 2008, 09:47 AM
I agree it is not too graphic. It is actually a mild representation of what it is reminding us about. I hope it gets people's attention, even if it is the attention of the loved ones of the dead. Maybe they will demand action from the admins.

I've also noticed that Oleg's work does have a tendency at times to widen the gulf that separates the people on both sides of this issue, rather than trying to win over fencesitters or antis. But that strategy allows him to do his thing without pulling punches and can be powerful.

I don't believe the admins have blood on their hands. They made a policy that seemed reasonable and prudent to them, based on the policies at practically every other college in America. Sure they made a bad decision, but if they are to blame, then so is the student body that willingly accepted and in reality probably preferred that policy.

bdickens
September 1, 2008, 09:54 AM
Sometimes the truth hurts and this time I hope it hurts the VT administration gets their feelings hurt bad by this.

They need to see this. So does the rest of the country.

People in this country also need to see the pictures and video of people jumping to their deaths out of the windows of the World Trade Center. And the videos of the murderous vermin in Iraq hacking people's heads off. People need to be forced to see that. Over and over.

Enough of hiding the truth and sugarcoating things!

Vern Humphrey
September 1, 2008, 10:09 AM
To any VT administrators who feel this poster is too graphic, I say, "If your eye cannot bear to see what your hand has done, you should have stayed your hand."

Rokyudai
September 1, 2008, 10:48 AM
Puh-leez....

Those with a delicate constitution need not apply. I see worse images on foxnews.com anyway.

What are the similarities between something like this and, say, a road side memorial, a candlelight vigil, a yellow ribbon on your car, a "never forget" 9/11 twin tower button, a funeral mass? THEY ALL CAN ENVOKE EMOTION AND HOPEFULLY REFLECTION.

Now, how many times have you not even given a second glance to that white cross adorned with flowers in the highway median? Don't feel bad. Some symbols do not register as fast or as deep as others. Powerful statements need powerful images.

Keep up the good work Oleg.

Rok

iiibdsiil
September 1, 2008, 11:01 AM
Damn, that's powerful.

When you make a mistake you get to deal with the consequences.

Good job Oleg!

Oleg Volk
September 1, 2008, 11:30 AM
From a current VT student

That is a very potent graphic. Even as we get to be well over a year since
the attack, the memories for me are still very fresh. That was a pretty
upsetting image. I only wish the administrators would see it and be as
moved to take preventative action. They've made some efforts, but they've
all been costly and ineffective thus far, except perhaps the changing of
door handles so they can no longer be chained shut. At least if anybody
made it to the hall, they could have escaped.

Anyway, thanks for the poster!


For a responding cop

I have to admit this one doesn't really do it for me. It is so far off the mark of what I remember that I simply can't identify with it. Unfortunately what I remember may be too gruesome to reproduce in photographs.

rainbowbob
September 1, 2008, 12:51 PM
Let's not be so tolerant that we tolerate intolerance.

I like that...

I too believe the VT admins should have lost sleep over this tragedy. And they should have heeded the calls for CCW on campus. And they should have the sense and decency to change their position and allow it now.

But...

Implying that they are criminally culpable for this horror is not factually, legally, or morally accurate.

Any more than implying that the gun dealer who sold the shooter the firearms is criminally culpable.

I'm sure my own bias is showing - but I am much more inclined to hold the "mental health" system culpable for allowing a person who was clearly a danger to himself and others to decide (with a diseased brain) to refuse treatment.

If I remember correctly, he was ordered to get treatment - but there was zero follow-up or enforcement by authorities. Why is it that nobody is offended by that fact?

You may be squeamish about infringing someone like Cho's civil liberties by forcing them into treatment.

I'm not.

Oleg Volk
September 1, 2008, 01:02 PM
VT admins have not changed the campus prohibition on carry, though I suspect it is rather less heeded now. So they are still aiding the next killer to come through...they've had two thus far.

Vern Humphrey
September 1, 2008, 01:13 PM
Implying that they are criminally culpable for this horror is not factually, legally, or morally accurate.]
The right to keep and bear arms is constitutional. In this case the government, through the agency of the VT administration, violated the student's rights, deprived them of the means of self-defense, and they died.

Violation of civil rights under color of authority, contributing to the victims' death.

Yeah, that's a crime.

Soybomb
September 1, 2008, 01:16 PM
Some of the survivor stories talk about students in classrooms playing dead and hiding under bodies as cho walked the room executing survivors. I'm not sure what it is but I think there's a strong poster in those stories.

sm
September 1, 2008, 01:47 PM
Re: Pictures to promote agendas.

-JFK being assassinated in Dallas, Showing the motorcade over and over again.
Jackie covering John, The Secret Service Agent coming up the back of the car...
Little Kennedy standing there in his little suit and flag in his little hand at his daddy's funeral.


-Sarah Brady and Jim being shot the day Reagan was shot.

How many times has Sarah used those images to promote her agenda?

Did Ronald Reagan? One of his comments was " I forgot to duck".

-Oklahoma City Bombing.
How many times did that graphic get shown and how many agendas by various factions used those graphics.

-9/11 and how many times did the media play those over and over again?


Hey, can't the heat, get the hades out of my country!

rainbowbob
September 1, 2008, 02:04 PM
sm:

I don't think it's about tolerating the heat. Most of us know that the real images are far worse than what Oleg portrays in his poster. And most of us have seen far worse images.

I do think it's about - at least in part - the question of whether this is an effective way of using imagery to advance our agenda (the right to CCW on college campuses).

Does anyone believe that a bloody image placing the blame for Cho's violence on the VT administrators is going to advance that agenda?

I think we sometimes make the mistake of "preaching to the choir" - when what is needed is to convince those who are either undecided or uneducated regarding this issue. Alienating those folks might give some satisfaction - but it doesn't get the job done.

Oleg Volk
September 1, 2008, 02:05 PM
The purpose of this graphic is to scare college administrators into doing the right thing.

shdwfx
September 1, 2008, 02:07 PM
Powerful photograph, but I know it will repulse your target audience. 80% of people will be angry - not at the VT administration - but at the pro-gun/life crowd for being "insensitive."

Don't like it but that's reality. I would wager my NRA membership that the VT authorities will only dig in their heels and be more sure of their anti-gun position after seeing this. "In your face" is a turn off and will have an adverse effect.

basicblur
September 1, 2008, 02:12 PM
I like that...
Thanks...I got a million of 'em!
Well, actually that's it...I got nuttin'. :D
(Don't really remember who I heard say that)

AFA making folks uncomfortable...isn't that the purpose of the poster?
One should-no, make that MUST feel uncomfortable about what happened at VT-trying to whitewash it by not thinking about it is what allows history to repeat itself.

I saw a program on The History Channel ‘bout a year ago on The Holocaust. The Russians were the first to find/report the camps, but no one believed them, claiming they were just trying to create sympathy for themselves. When allied forces did find them, Eisenhower ordered as many officers, enlisted men, AND townspeople to tour the camps as they were found-even made the townspeople help with the disposal of bodies.
His reason was that unless we force as many people to see this as possible, he predicted that in the future some would start to deny it ever happened.
Even after his steps to prevent such, we still have genocide and there are those who deny The Holocaust ever happened.

If people are not forced to remember the horrors of VT, they will allow it to happen again.

rainbowbob
September 1, 2008, 02:12 PM
The purpose of this graphic is to scare college administrators into doing the right thing.

Oleg:
I sympathize with the intent. I just don't believe that even a single VT administrator - or anybody else in a position to change the rules - will have their heart and/or mind changed by your indictment. At least not changed in the direction we want them to go. It may even work against us.

So that leaves us with some satisfaction of our moral outrage - and little else.

Nolo
September 1, 2008, 02:33 PM
I sympathize with the intent. I just don't believe that even a single VT administrator - or anybody else in a position to change the rules - will have their heart and/or mind changed by your indictment. At least not changed in the direction we want them to go. It may even work against us.

So that leaves us with some satisfaction of our moral outrage - and little else.
Okay.
It is a tightrope act.
Ultimately, our goal is to influence public opinion.
The question is, what is needed to accomplish that?
Oleg has toed the nicey side of things quite frequently, even with the VT issue (which he has covered extensively).
This image is a sort of covering our bases if you will.
I don't know what outcome it'll have.
Sometimes you have to compensate for other people being wimps, and sometimes you have to slap them in the face.
Now we have the resources to do both.

yenchisks
September 1, 2008, 02:42 PM
Life is in the blood: what do you think would happen if you had this picture on a t-shirt and walk around campus?

george29
September 1, 2008, 06:09 PM
The purpose of this graphic is to scare college administrators into doing the right thing.



You Know You're a Liberal ....


If you think Rob Reiner had to stretch to play the liberal in "All in the Family"


If you think the answer to ANY crime, infraction, or injustice is counseling.


If you've spent no less than 30 years in the walls of academia and don't see how today could be too much different from the '60s.


If you think the criminal has more rights than the police who arrest this criminal, unless the crime is sexual harassment, or racism.


If you use the term 'open-minded' and don't care that it can't be defined in absolute terms.


If you think only white people can be racist.


If Clarence Thomas made you sick, Bob Packwood made you protest, but Bill Clinton is a victim of partisan politics.

Added before I started keeping track of when I added new items :-)

If you think that teenager's sexual behavior is uncontrollable, but hardened violent criminals should be released on parole after serving a cut sentence in a "correctional institution".


If you think Maxine Waters and Sheila Jackson Lee are articulate geniuses but Justice Clarence Thomas, Dr. Alan Keyes and Dr. Walter Williams are dolts.


If you think Rush Limbaugh and Michael Reagan are mean spirited racists and promote hate crime but Maxine Waters, John Conyers and Louis Farakahn aren't and don't.


If you think that the Constitution is a living document and should be changed but the writings of Karl Marx are "written in stone".


If you think burning the United States flag should be Constitutionally protected but burning a cross should be outlawed.


If you think that tax cuts hurt poor people and are uncompassionate but taking 30% from their paychecks is compassionate


If your idea of hell is having to mind your own business and not meddle in other people's lives.


If you believe that posting the "Ten Commandments" in schools will hurt the children, but putting "Heather Has Two Mommies" or "Ask Alice" (on the internet) won't.


If you think that the American Dream could have only been accomplished in the '60s.


if you think that conservatives have no sense of humor then shudder at the idea of a Clinton joke.


If you actually do believe that Clinton doesn't know the definition of the words "alone", "is", or "correct".


If you believe that Columbus is a mean-spirit bringer of genocide, and never should have explored to the new world, which meant that no one would have religious or taxation freedom whatsoever.


If you think that the only way the tragedy in Littleton, CO could have been avoided was to restrict the access of the guns, two of which were bought on the black market.


If you actually think the multicultural movement of the '90s works better than organized religion.


If you don't want the Christian Right imposing their morality on you, but you want to impose big government on everyone else because they won't do the right thing.


You're a liberal if you can't see the irony in your own beliefs.


If you believe Peter Jennings is a very educated and intelligent man.


If you can actually believe everyone around Bill Clinton is lying, but Bill Clinton himself is telling the truth.


If you point to God's forgiveness of King David in reference to Bill Clinton but "forget" to read the rest of the scripture about the ruin that he inflicted on his family, his kingdom and himself.


If you think that the only acceptable hate crime is Christian bashing.


If you want to make the rich "pay their fair share" but leave Ted (more people have been killed in my car than in an American nuclear power plant) Kennedy and Dick Gebhardt out of the definition of the rich.


If your idea of compassion is giving a homeless person a shopping cart but expecting them to accept the responsibilities of life is mean spirited, racist, bigoted, etc. ad nauseum.


If you think Princess Diana was compassionate for hugging poor children and children with AIDS (while "forgetting" about her getting in her limo and driving away) but Mother Teresa makes you uncomfortable.


If you think that "dumbing down" America's school kids is compassionate but holding them to high educational standards is "mean spirited", racist, bigoted, etc. ad nauseum.


If you think that Teddy Kennedy, Jesse Jackson and the KKK don't have anything in common (at least the KKK is honest about their goals).


If you think that people need to be punished for good choices and rewarded for bad ones.


You're a liberal if you think what Hitler did to the Jews is horrible but the "Christian Right" is dangerous and needs to be done away with.


If you don't see the parallel between yourself, Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin and Chairman Mao.


If you believe that the "700 Club" are a group of fakes or actors but the people on "The Jerry Springer" show are real people.


If you actually refer to the Reagan and Bush Presidencies as one Presidency.


If you think that affirmative action is the only way to solve racial problems in America.


If you think the best way to care about a disease is to wear a ribbon.


If you think that pouring blood on a $1,500 fur coat is a sure-fire way to get your message across, but if anyone protests outside an abortion clinic, they're extremists!


If Sean Hannity makes no sense and Alan Colmes makes perfect sense.


If you voted for Mondale in 1984 thinking that raising your taxes was a good idea.


If you refer to listening to Jesse Jackson or Sam Donaldson as "equal time".


If you make snide remarks to guys for looking at women but champion Clinton's right to do whatever he wants with his interns.


If you think the impeachment vote was 'just about sex'.


If you think all the attacks against Republicans are justified, but got outraged about the Willie Horton incident.


If you actually think Clinton 'only inhaled'.


If the last 'good old president' you remember was Carter.


If you condemn Dan Quayle for misspelling potato and then ignore the witticisms of Al Gore (who are these people?)


If you think Alec Baldwin was justified in his protest on the Jay Leno show.


If you actually think there IS a way that the Republicans can poison the water supply to certain people, and destroy the ozone layer.


If you believe any of the conspiracies such as that the AIDS virus was started by the government or that certain products cause sterility in black males, but think "The X-files" is too far fetched.


If you think that Watergate and Iran-Contra was a travesty of justice, but anything against Clinton is partisan!


If you believe VH-1 when they tell you that warning labels were put on by "Conservatives led by Tipper Gore".


If you believe Clinton's 'change of heart' after the sudden switch in the 1994 election.


If you use the words "right wing extremist" at least four times in any given day.


If you think that bombing on Iraq couldn't have possibly had anything to do with the impeachment vote... then why did they stop as soon as the vote was done?


If you think that the four cops who beat Rodney King should have been thrown in jail forever, but the four thugs who beat Reginald Denny should have fair justice.


You complain that your community has too many white people and the Catholic church you go to doesn't have enough ethnicity, but you're the first one with a for sale sign in your yard when blacks start moving in.


You called Vietnam Veterans "baby killers" but think that allowing a woman to suck her baby into a sink is a constitutionally protected right.


You think that Joe Camel and big tobacco are out to kill your babies, but allowing a babies brain to be sucked out of its skull when it's 1/3 of the way out of the birth canal is paramount to a free society.


You scream if a CEO sleeps with an employee but think that Clinton receiveing oral sex from an Intern is just fine.


You believe that Clinton was forced to lie under oath by the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"


You think that Ken Starr is the devil's helper for calling Monica's mother to testify but believe that Ollie North's wife and minister being called before the grand Jury was fair.


You believe Clinton's numbers about the number of jobs created and don't credit it to the businesses given opportunities in the 1980s.

You know no recorded economic history (e.g. the massive stagflation and recession) before the Reagan Era.

You think sexual harassment is rampant, date rape pervasive, domestic violence common and Paula Jones is lying.

You get mad when rape victims' sexual history is plastered all over the news media, but think Paula Jones' sexual history "must be made public."

You hate Hillary jokes.

You hate Monica jokes.

You pale at the execution of child killers, but defend the killing of unborn children as an expression of choice.

You fully support women who have "exercised their right to choose" when they abort in the 3rd trimester, but think Amy Grossberg should get the death penalty before the trial even goes to court.

You think trees have feelings, animals can conceptualize and the fetus is a blob of protoplasm.

You wear a red ribbon to show your support for a cure for AIDS but oppose all animal experimentation needed to find that cure

If you hear a news report of a man beat nearly to death because he is a minority or gay and you rally about punishing the bigot who committed the terrible act BUT, if you hear a news report of a man beat nearly to death for his money, and you start talking about the poor disadvantaged person who is forced to commit such acts to survive.

You are convinced that Frank Capra films and Norman Rockwell paintings are lies and distortions but "Platoon," "Dances with Wolves" and "Thelma and Louise" are realistic.

You thought Walt Disney was saccharine sweet and terminally cutesy-pie - until it made Pocahontas.

You think a moment of silent prayer at the beginning of the school day constitutes government indoctrination and an intrusion on parental authority, while sex education, condom distribution and multiculturalism are values-neutral.

You agonize over threats to the natural environment (acid rain, toxic waste) but are oblivious to threats to the social environment (pornography, promiscuity, and family dissolution).

You are appalled at all the money being spent investigating the alleged illegal activities of Bill Clinton, but insist that investigating 75 charges (74 which were dismissed as unfounded) charges against Newt Ginrich was "the only just thing to do."

You want to outlaw cigarrettes and legalize marijuana

You want to legalize cocaine and outlaw handguns. You think cops are pigs and criminals are products of their environment.

You believe the National Rifle Association helps criminals while the American Civil Liberties Union protects the innocent.

You think Rush Limbaugh is responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing but are outraged by suggestions that Ted Kaczynski (the suspected Unabomber) and Al Gore have anything in common.

You just know that everything Rush Limbaugh says is a lie but you have never listened to him.

Jesse Jackson makes sense to you. Barbra Streisand makes even more sense.

You think Herblock cartoons are funny and Janet Reno is totally hot.

You believe corporate profits are obscene but government spending is too low and the American people are undertaxed.

You see cartoons condemning religions and making fun of Christianity as funny and an expression of free speech, but think the cartoon B.C. should be banned.

You think deficits are caused by tax loopholes.

You think AIDS is spread by insufficient funding.

You consider the Catholic bishops noble and idealistic when they oppose capital punishment and welfare cuts but dangerous fanatics trying to legislate their theology when they defend the right to life.

You are convinced that proponents of welfare reform hate the poor and opponents of affirmative action hate minorities, but AIDS activists who bash the Pope and People for the American Way types who go psycho over Protestant "fundamentalists" are guardians of democracy.

You attribute every minority problem to entrenched, institutional racism and the legacies of slavery and segregation.

You think the black middle class is a myth created by Newt Gingrich.

You view race riots as justifiable expressions of rage over injustice and fail to see the similarities between a black mob burning a Korean store and a white mob in the Jim Crow era lynching a black man.

You don't understand all of the whining about affirmative action and are more than willing to sacrifice someone else's employment or education opportunity to assuage your guilt.

You marched against American involvement in Vietnam, thought the Gulf war was unnecessary but believe 25,000 U.S. troops in Bosnia are vital to our national interests.

You see no correlation between welfare and the rise of illegitimacy, judicial leniency and surging crime rates, or addiction and an entertainment industry that glorifies drug abuse. But you believe Richard Nixon is responsible for everything horrible that's happened in the past quarter-century.

You think those child-abusing, religious fanatics at Waco had it coming but the illegal immigrants roughed up by California deputies - after leading them on a high-speed chase - are the victims of the decade.

You continually say that conservatives have no sense of humor, but after reading this page, think that I am cold and mean-spirited.


Lastly, you're a liberal if - you don't get the point of my web page!


Liberals, the last bastion of serious nonsense.

3KillerBs
September 1, 2008, 09:52 PM
Excellent!

Its high time that people be MADE to realize that actions have consequences and that the consequence of preventing people from defending themselves is that you get to share the guilt with the nutcases who take advantage of your criminal empowerment zone.

Travis McGee
September 1, 2008, 10:03 PM
IMO, it's too bloody/graphic to reach the intended audience (fence sitting students) in an effective way.

Also, perhaps a "no guns allowed" sign might be on the ground near the victim's hand? To tie the photograph to the message directly. That is, to include the message in the photo, not only in the caption.

akodo
September 1, 2008, 10:29 PM
The blood is on their hands, too!

While you may pause there for inflection while speaking, I am pretty sure no comma is the correct punctuation.

3KillerBs
September 1, 2008, 10:31 PM
BTW -- anyone who thinks that image would disturb the college age students, especially the guys, has never seen anyone playing a video game.

The administrators who put that policy in place and the politicians who refused to pre-empt it NEED to be disturbed.

akodo
September 1, 2008, 10:33 PM
Also, I'd love to see one that was a dark wooden floor with a pool of blood coming in from one edge, partial bootprint in the pool, a scattering of college papers with some empty casings strewn about and the stamp of that bloody partial boot print making a path across the floor

orionengnr
September 1, 2008, 10:47 PM
Oleg--
As always, I like your style. My opinion only, that waiting this long is too long (and yes, I understand that the day after is way too early).

Much as the real story behind 9/11 was seldom seen and never heard about except for one movie (what horrors occurred onboard those jets?) our MSM chooses to gloss over the real issues and lead us into arguments over red herrings....

I hope the VT students take this and run with it.

BTW, legal on-campus carry will be on the agenda of the Texas State Rifle Association next year. Our legislature only convenes bi-annually, to limit the amount of damage they can do... :)

stevemis
September 1, 2008, 10:48 PM
How about getting 32 students into a bus and driving them to each of the administrators houses at 3am? They can stand outside and beg and plead for their lives at the tops of their collective lungs.

That would cause some sleepless nights.

Oana
September 2, 2008, 03:03 AM
The image, IMHO, isn't too disturbing.

I do think it's likely to widen the gulf between the anti- and pro-gun camps. It may not win over fence-sitters at all; accusing administrators who probably *were* just trying to do the right thing (as they saw it) of having blood on their hands is a very accusatory tactic. I might still say it, just in a different way.

But as Oleg said, it's in the hands of VT students, let them decide. I think they tried the nice, polite method before the shootings, when they tried to get CCW allowed on campus. Maybe another approach will work now.

loneviking
September 2, 2008, 03:34 AM
Good one, Oleg! The administrators of VT need to have the results of their liberal, misguided, bleeding heart agenda rubbed into their faces, and they need it done on a daily basis until they accept that the fact that gun control laws absolutely fail to protect anyone.

Nematocyst
September 2, 2008, 03:44 AM
The image is compelling.

The msg is correct.

Grammar aside, it's one of your best.

However, it would be more powerful with
"The blood is also on their hands."
in smaller font with no exclamation mark.

Here, understated is more powerful.
Sometimes, less is more. In this case,
shouting is less effective than cold assertion.

That also leaves "their hands" as the final words.

The purpose of this graphic is to scare
college administrators into doing the right thing. As a former college faculty, I assert that most college admins
are corporate executives driven by FTE's and bottom lines
instead of either enlightened education or compassion.

The purpose of this graphic is to motivate students and their families
to exert pressure on college administrators to do the right thing.

jakemccoy
September 2, 2008, 03:48 AM
I like it.

3KillerBs
September 2, 2008, 07:44 AM
accusing administrators who probably *were* just trying to do the right thing (as they saw it) of having blood on their hands is a very accusatory tactic. I might still say it, just in a different way.

"Trying" to do the right thing is not justification for doing the wrong thing.

Those who hold authority also bear responsibility. Their choices have consequences. When those consequences include the loss of innocent life they SHOULD be accused of wrongdoing. They SHOULD be held responsible. They should have their personal responsibility for the shedding of innocent blood driven home to them and to all observers in a way that makes it impossible for anyone to ever again claim ignorance and good intentions in the same situation.

We say that "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" for a reason -- to remind people that intentions aren't good enough. Actually results must be considered as well when making our choices.

Vern Humphrey
September 2, 2008, 07:54 AM
accusing administrators who probably *were* just trying to do the right thing (as they saw it) of having blood on their hands is a very accusatory tactic. I might still say it, just in a different way.
They were not trying to do the right thing. They were trying to do the wrong thing -- deprive students of their civil rights. And people died as a result.

rainbowbob
September 2, 2008, 01:12 PM
Here is a thought exercise in alternative reality:

Let's suppose the VT administrators had seen the light and permitted CCW on campus prior to the massacre.

I submit that the number of students and/or instructors actually carrying anywhere in the vicinity of the shooter would have probably been very small. Maybe one or two at the most

But let's assume at least one person was within range and had a firearm.

I realize we here are all certain we would have stepped right up with no thought for our personal safety and heroically made the perfect head-shot.

In reality, it would have taken an extraordinary amount of courage, luck, and skill for that armed citizen to successfully take out the determined shooter and avoid being killed.

In the unfortunate absence of any one of those elements (either courage, luck, or skill) - the outcome might have been pretty much the same as it actually was.

In this alternative reality - who do you blame?

Oleg Volk
September 2, 2008, 01:14 PM
Most of the blame goes to the killer in any case. But, as the events showed, the moment Cho faced armed opposition, he suicided. So any return fire, even inaccurate, would have driven him off.

Vern Humphrey
September 2, 2008, 01:16 PM
If you've ever been at sea, you might have had sobering thoughts about your life jacket -- being afloat in the middle of the ocean depending on a life jacket is not exactly the best thing that could happen to you.

But only a fool would make a rule that ships are not permitted to carry life jackets.

elChupacabra!
September 2, 2008, 01:17 PM
In this alternative reality - who do you blame?

Cho and Cho alone.

In your alternate reality, at least the choice was available to the students to arm themselves. If you wanted to "blame" them for chosing to not carry, you could... but that would be terribly heartless. They have already paid the price for not doing so.

rainbowbob
September 2, 2008, 01:46 PM
In answer to my own question about an alternative reality (as well as the actual reality) - I blame Cho - and I blame the mental health system that ordered this obviously dangerous, paranoid, psychotic young man to get treatment. And then did absolutely nothing to enforce that order and ensure that he did.

I realize I am repeatedly banging a different drum here. Maybe I'm completely off topic. But where is the outrage for that?

Involuntary psychiatric treatment for those among us that are dangerously psychotic and refuse treatment would do more to prevent these tragedies than any of the other proposed solutions put together (including campus CCW which I support 100%).

Had Cho received appropriate treatment, these deaths might have been prevented - and the prospect of some courageous student or instructor having to put their life on the line would have been unnecessary.

elChupacabra!
September 2, 2008, 01:53 PM
Rainbowbob -

You make a good point. When I was 15, I was involved in a similar shooting at my church, Wedgwood Baptist in Fort Worth, TX (September 15, 1999... most people who knew it happened have forgotten, but I haven't yet).

A man named Larry Gene Ashbrook entered my church, very angry about a number of things, and shot up a See You At the Pole youth rally I was attending for about 5-8 minutes (hard to tell, perception of the passage of time goes immediately under that much stress, or did for me at least...). He shot a total of 14 people, killing 7 of them, before he took his own life.

Larry Gene Ashbrook was probably a paranoid schizophrenic and needed help. If someone had cared enough to get him that help - and if it could have been administered to him - things might have gone very differently that Wednesday evening.

Even if someone in the sanctuary had been armed - and most of us there were teenagers - he still would have killed several people before he made it there. Many of his victims were standing just inside the south entrance, in the foyer - I think he shot 3 people there. He came in smoking a cigarette, was asked by the custodian to put it out, and he opened up, just like that.

Being armed would have changed things... but him getting the help he needed would have changed them more.

FourTeeFive
September 2, 2008, 01:59 PM
The campus administrators ACTIVELY petitioned the VA legislature to ban CCW on campus a year before the shooting.

That point is lost in the poster. I personally think the message will be lost to the general public. It works for us here, but for the non-gun oriented person they won't really get what happened and why it happened.

GingerGuy
September 2, 2008, 02:15 PM
The tally up to now is as follows…

45…Support the poster.
8….Against the poster.
15…Unknown, various comments.


Comments of note…

The campus administrators ACTIVELY petitioned the VA legislature to ban CCW on campus a year before the shooting.

The purpose of this graphic is to scare college administrators into doing the right thing.

But only a fool would make a rule that ships are not permitted to carry life jackets.

Someone with money , do this Poster on a Bill Board, and oh please, let there be a Bill Board that is viewable from Admins offices at VT.

I am fed up with Insurance Companies dictating what Schools , Businesses and whomever else does what.

One does not hear of Evil going to a Police Station and shooting up the joint.

------------------

…is likely to offend people, and potentially make them dismiss our position on the issue.

it's too bloody/graphic.

rainbowbob
September 2, 2008, 02:50 PM
Larry Gene Ashbrook was probably a paranoid schizophrenic and needed help. If someone had cared enough to get him that help - and if it could have been administered to him - things might have gone very differently that Wednesday evening.

elChupacabra!:
Amen, brother. I am so sorry for the terrible losses to your church family and for the unforgettable trauma you have suffered. Thank you for sharing your story and the insights you have gained from it.

elChupacabra!
September 2, 2008, 02:55 PM
rainbowbob,

Thanks for the kind words. Time heals all sorts of wounds, although some things you always carry with you in one form or another.

I will tell you this - my experience there has made me the most pro-RKBA person I know, as I learned at a relatively young age that no matter what else happens, in the end, at the moment of truth, YOU are the only one you can count on to defend yourself against aggression.

I know it sounds crazy to think you should carry a gun with you into church. We would also like to think of our classrooms as safe places - I understand that desire.

But be assured - there are no safe places that aren't made so by the promise of explosive, deadly force against the threat of violence.

People need to be reminded of this, as most continue to live under the false assumption that evil will never knock on their door. I appreciate the poster.

rainbowbob
September 2, 2008, 02:59 PM
I know it sounds crazy to think you should carry a gun with you into church.

I suspect that to most of us here, it doesn't sound crazy at all.

Green Lantern
September 2, 2008, 03:00 PM
Being as I hold similar sentiments to those expressed by the poster - count me as another that likes it "as is."

elChupacabra!
September 2, 2008, 03:00 PM
I suspect that to most of us here, it doesn't sound crazy at all.

THAT is good to hear... it's good to be in like-minded company for a change :)

Nolo
September 2, 2008, 03:03 PM
I know it sounds crazy to think you should carry a gun with you into church.
One of the art projects (Ha! Like I do any art any more...) I've had in the back of my head for a long time is one where a militiaman, scary-looking rifle slung over his back, is kneeling at the altar.
I'm not sure how the image would flesh itself out, but I think it'd be really powerful.

Oana
September 2, 2008, 08:03 PM
"Trying" to do the right thing is not justification for doing the wrong thing.

Certainly not! Which is why I said that I might still say the same thing, just not quite so accusatorily. (Is that a word? :)) There's a chance that the wording would push people away from our real message.


Those who hold authority also bear responsibility. Their choices have consequences. When those consequences include the loss of innocent life they SHOULD be accused of wrongdoing. They SHOULD be held responsible. They should have their personal responsibility for the shedding of innocent blood driven home to them and to all observers in a way that makes it impossible for anyone to ever again claim ignorance and good intentions in the same situation.

Can't say that I argue with any of that! However, they're not directly responsible. The only person ultimately responsible is the murderer, and I can't say what would have happened even if they'd allowed CCW. Therefore, I'm not going to put them on the same plane as someone who walked in and cold-bloodedly killed people. But, I do believe they bear some responsibility, to be sure.

Off topic - are you the same 3KillerBs that sometimes comments over at DressADay?

In the unfortunate absence of any one of those elements (either courage, luck, or skill) - the outcome might have been pretty much the same as it actually was.

In this alternative reality - who do you blame?

I blame the murderer (not saying his name). I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know what would've happened. But at least if they'd allowed CCW, they would've had a chance. And that's all we're asking for.

And as for your other comments - I guess the reason I'm not so up in arms about the mental health issue (at least, right now - not saying it *isn't* an issue) is because there are always going to be nutcases out there. There are some who will slip through the cracks, whether the cracks are huge or small. We've got to allow people the chance to protect themselves. And then, maybe even psychotic nutcases will think twice before trying to commit mass murder.

Catherine
September 2, 2008, 08:54 PM
Vern H.,

Good post about the 'life jackets' and being out at sea. Thank you!

Catherine

scrat
September 2, 2008, 09:13 PM
i dont know oleg a little too graphic this time. the picture catches your eyes and you really dont read much

3KillerBs
September 2, 2008, 09:30 PM
Quote:
Those who hold authority also bear responsibility. Their choices have consequences. When those consequences include the loss of innocent life they SHOULD be accused of wrongdoing. They SHOULD be held responsible. They should have their personal responsibility for the shedding of innocent blood driven home to them and to all observers in a way that makes it impossible for anyone to ever again claim ignorance and good intentions in the same situation.

Can't say that I argue with any of that! However, they're not directly responsible. The only person ultimately responsible is the murderer, and I can't say what would have happened even if they'd allowed CCW. Therefore, I'm not going to put them on the same plane as someone who walked in and cold-bloodedly killed people. But, I do believe they bear some responsibility, to be sure.

Off topic - are you the same 3KillerBs that sometimes comments over at DressADay?

Naturally, the shooter bears the prime responsibility, but I believe that the people who set up the circumstances that facilitated the shooting MUST be FORCED to acknowledge their responsibility as a type of accessory before the fact and that they should be punished for their wrongdoing despite the fact that they did wrong while meaning to do right.

I'm a strong believer in the idea that rights go with responsibility and that the privileges of authority go with an active duty and obligation to do right with that authority. I'm not big on excuses and "sorry" doesn't fix anything -- especially if the situation you are being "sorry" about was avoidable if you'd exercised due diligence about your responsibilities. :)

And yes, I am the same 3KillerBs.

10 Ring Tao
September 3, 2008, 12:40 AM
Sure, it might seem a bit....dramatic.

The thing is, it is 100% true. The administrators of VT do indeed have blood on their hands, as illustrated:

Gun bill gets shot down by panel (From last legislative session '06)
http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-50658

HB 1572, which would have allowed handguns on college campuses, died in subcommittee.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."

rainbowbob
September 3, 2008, 02:46 AM
In June, Tech's governing board approved a violence prevention policy reiterating its ban on students or employees carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them into campus facilities.

My primary concern with Oleg's poster is whether it helps - or hurts - the cause of campus CCW. My initial opinion was that it hurts the cause if it alienates the target of the indictment. The ones in power.

It's beginning to dawn on me that they aren't the ones that matter. It won't help the current administration see the error of their way. The board that approved the ban will not be moved by this poster.

But you know...maybe some of the students will be. And eventually some of them may hold the power to change things.

cpaspr
September 3, 2008, 10:32 AM
rainbowbob -
But you know...maybe some of the students will be. And eventually some of them may hold the power to change things.

And "eventually" can happen sooner rather than later. If students refuse to attend schools that force them to be disarmed in large enough numbers, and let the admins know exactly why they won't be attending that particular school, the message will get across.

rainbowbob
September 3, 2008, 12:06 PM
If students refuse to attend schools that force them to be disarmed in large enough numbers...

That is true. But we have to remember that CCW holders are a small minority of the adult population - and an even smaller percentage of the student population. So I don't think that the large numbers required to effect these changes are there...yet.

As an example, I checked the numbers in my state (WA) and discovered that only 5% of people over the age of 18 hold a concealed pistol license. Considering that you can't get a license until you are 21, and that many (most?) students are under 21, the percentage of students with a CPL would be much smaller.

KnightHawk67
September 3, 2008, 12:37 PM
I think it boils down to this: the administration refuses to allow someone the chance of being in the right place at the right time & doing the right thing.

I mean, isn't that why we all want the right to defend ourselves?

KnightHawk67
September 3, 2008, 12:39 PM
Oh, and I liked the graphic. A little too wordy, but the graphic was appropriately shocking.

george29
September 3, 2008, 12:56 PM
Most of the blame goes to the killer in any case.

I don't blame the mentally ill for being ill, I blame the mentally healthy for refusing to accept the truth/reality as it is. For a more complete picture and proof of my words please read the following quote.

In June, Tech's governing board approved a violence prevention policy reiterating its ban on students or employees carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them into campus facilities.

The following cartoon is NOT posted in humor! It relects the truth.

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l15/avisamuel/liberaldefenseposture.jpg

rainbowbob
September 3, 2008, 01:21 PM
I don't blame the mentally ill for being ill, I blame the mentally healthy for refusing to accept the truth/reality as it is.

:confused:

george29:
Mental illness can be defined in part as the inability to determine the difference between reality and delusion. A person with a severe mental illness CAN'T tell the difference. Therefore, they can't be blamed for not accepting truth/reality any more than they can be blamed for being ill.

The VT administrators presumably are not mentally ill and CAN tell the difference between reality and delusion. Therefore, they can be blamed for not accepting the truth/reality.

I don't know that his indicts them as culpable for the murders - but it does indict them as incompetent fools bound by their own ideological agenda.

george29
September 4, 2008, 12:57 AM
Gee Bob, I thought that's what I said in my own way!

rainbowbob
September 4, 2008, 01:41 AM
Gee Bob, I thought that's what I said in my own way!

george29:

My apology and red face. :o

I spaced and misread your words, "I blame the mentally healthy..." as, "I blame the mentally ill..."

You said it better and much more concise.

Mea culpa.

JKimball
September 4, 2008, 04:09 PM
The thing is, it is 100% true. The administrators of VT do indeed have blood on their hands, as illustrated:

10Ring,

I still disagree. Maybe the term "blood on their hands" means something different to you than it does to me. To me if someone has blood on their hands that means they should be standing at trial on charges of murder, accomplice to murder, conspiracy to commit murder, or manslaughter.

Don't we all tend to say that individuals should take responsibility for their own protection? If we are going to start throwing the blame around on people besides Cho, then we would have to hold the student body accountable as well. Would you say that the students that were killed had their own blood on their own hands? How many of them joined the fight the previous year to make CCW on campus possible? My guess is that it wasn't many. (In any case, it wasn't enough. And the surviving students still haven't done it.) But the fact of the matter is that it is not their fault they were killed, it was Cho's fault. Sure, they made some wrong decisions too, but they didn't kill themselves.

Now if you want to start talking conspiracies, I'd really like to know how much evidence the psych drug companies and FDA have regarding the violent/suicidal side effects of these drugs that are making them billions of dollars.

Soybomb
September 4, 2008, 04:50 PM
I still disagree. Maybe the term "blood on their hands" means something different to you than it does to me. To me if someone has blood on their hands that means they should be standing at trial on charges of murder, accomplice to murder, conspiracy to commit murder, or manslaughter.
There are different degrees of culpability. One doesn't have to literally get their hands bloody to be partially responsible. To pull from wikipedia for a minute

Modern crimes codes in the United States usually make distinct four degrees of culpability.

Legal definitions are:
1.) A person acts intentionally with respect to a material element of an offence when:
if the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result; and
if the element involves the attendant circumstances, he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist.

2.) A person acts knowingly with respect to a material element of an offense when:
if the element involves the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances, he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such circumstances exist; and
if the element involves a result of his conduct, he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result.

3.) A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and intent of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

4.) A person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and intent of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.
Wouldn't one of these fit the VT admins who actively worked against allowing students to be able to protect themselves while on campus?

Don't we all tend to say that individuals should take responsibility for their own protection? If we are going to start throwing the blame around on people besides Cho, then we would have to hold the student body accountable as well. Would you say that the students that were killed had their own blood on their own hands? How many of them joined the fight the previous year to make CCW on campus possible? My guess is that it wasn't many. (In any case, it wasn't enough. And the surviving students still haven't done it.) But the fact of the matter is that it is not their fault they were killed, it was Cho's fault. Sure, they made some wrong decisions too, but they didn't kill themselves.
We generally don't blame the victims for being victimized. You'll find few people would say something like those soviets peasants are partially to blame for not arming themselves against stalin.

JKimball
September 4, 2008, 07:21 PM
Wouldn't one of these fit the VT admins who actively worked against allowing students to be able to protect themselves while on campus?

Soybomb,

Thanks for the definitions. I actually don't believe any of the definitions meet the actions of the VT administration. The closest you might say would be reckless, or negligent, but if you notice the bolded phrases:
3.) A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and intent of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

4.) A person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and intent of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.

The VT administration's policy was far from a gross deviation from the standard. In fact it was right in line with the standard policy of practically every other college in America.

george29
September 4, 2008, 11:43 PM
My apology and red face.


Thanks

FourNineFoxtrot
September 5, 2008, 04:42 AM
As a college student and youngish-person, I guess I'll add my vote to the pile.

I think the poster is good how it is.

Yeah, it's a brutal image, and the accusation of the VT administrators is equally brutal. But the poster is a pale shadow of the brutality of the action that spawned it. We need strong images. I know my generation needs strong images to have any sort of emotional effect. Innuendo and inference don't do it for us. A corpse sprawled on the floor, however, we can understand. The medium is the message, and this medium is one that can have an effect.

We must not be afraid of strong images and strong words. If our message is less than decisive, we will accomplish nothing. We are fighting for a right we believe is so fundamental to the human condition, to life itself, that we are horrified at the thought of it being taken from us, indeed, from anyone. Better that we share that horror with our political opponents in words and pictures. If we are determined enough, and lucky enough, perhaps words and pictures will win this fight... it is certainly better than any of the alternatives. So let's not hamper ourselves by pulling punches. Communication is today's battleground. We need to use it to the fullest possible extent.

Grey_Mana
September 5, 2008, 11:23 AM
Not realistic enough.







Tech doesn't have grey rugs like that, and what girl would wear white on white? No earrings, jewelery or body art?

If you enjoyed reading about "Placing blame" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!