Va. Tech Families Tentatively Back Deal

[Whilletal]

Va. Tech Families Tentatively Back Deal - washingtonpost.com

Most families of the Virginia Tech massacre victims have agreed in principle to accept an $11 million settlement in exchange for agreeing not to sue the state.

Ok I understand the pain of loosing a child. I have lost a son so I sympathize. But why should these people get to sue the state? The campus is an open campus and as such carries the risk of any number of crimes against students that are on the campus. If the same victims where killed in the same manner but off campus they wouldn't be able to sue anyone. As hard as it is people die and many of those are murdered. Thats the thing about life. It's gonna end. Its just a matter of when and how not if. I don't mean to sound cold hearted but It seems to me to be another case of looking to cash in on tragedy. OK let the attacks ensue

[Jack]

The state is ultimately responsible for what happens at a state-owned school. We all have the freedom to initiate a lawsuit against a responsible party for reparation. Whether or not we'd prevail is up to the judge or jury. Just because you can sue doesn't mean you'll win the suit.

[Whilletal]

It seems to me they should be able to sue the one who committed the crime. Why is it the fault of the school? I know I will come out on the loosing end with this but seriously. The students choose to go there and live there. Just like some choose to live off campus and work somewhere. So by the logic of suing the school I should be able to sue my landlord if someone shoots my wife in our rental even though he lives in another state.

[Jack]

Your argument is what the judge or jury have to consider. It can't be used as the basis for denying a person the right to sue a responsible party. In the above post, you're arguing for the defense.

[Anmon]

Whether these family's should be entitled to sue or not, this is only going to lead to more justification from the government of bringing their big brother security measures onto society, maybe thats why these incidents have been happening a lot so recently.

[Jack]

maybe thats why these incidents have been happening a lot so recently.

If by "incidents" you mean campus shootings, I'd blame that on dysfunctional humans who think they can solve their problems or enact their fantasies by killing others with firearms. Many are to some degree copycat acts.

[Anmon]

I blame it on a society that has allowed these dysfunctions through a myriad of ways to happen so much.
And for that I blame decades of deliberate and destructive social engineering patterns, taught and allowed and protected by the Illuminati. So as to create a lot of malfunctioning violent youth, so that these incidents could happen, so to allow justification for them to say we need a big brother state to protect us, when in reality it is just more control over us, and what we do.

[ParaTed2k]

Congratulations to all the winners of the Virginia Tech Sweepstakes.

[Chaossaber314]

I do have to wonder how Cho was able to kill two people at the dorms, walk across campus fully armed and two hours later with campus police swarming the dorms, open fire on a classroom building like 300 yards from that building AND ON TOP OF THAT, walk back to the SAME building he was at earlier where the police were just at. That to me says "F*ck up."

[Anmon]

Agreed, one sniper could have taken him out in less than fifteen minutes, too much talk these days and not enough action, the result of a nanny state society I guess.

[Domino]

The state should be sued for not allowing students and teachers to carry firearms. If the state's going to demand that everyone be defenseless, the state damn well better defend them. Since the state knows good and well that it cannot possibly defend them, it ought to allow them the means to defend themselves.

[Anmon]

Quote by: Domino The state should be sued for not allowing students and teachers to carry firearms. If the state's going to demand that everyone be defenseless, the state damn well better defend them. Since the state knows good and well that it cannot possibly defend them, it ought to allow them the means to defend themselves.

Thats never going to happen, but the state will be throwing in added security, don't worry about that.

[Jack]

Having everyone on campus armed will make it so much easier for the next nutjob to move about unnoticed until he* starts shooting.

(* Since every one of these campus shooters I can recall have been men, perhaps we should secure campuses by banning men from them. Then arm the women. Let's see whatever other inane ideas we can come up with.)

[Anmon]

A sensible idea would be to have undercover security pose as students take courses there etc, and have their arms secured somewhere they can reach them quickly.

[Gods_Mercenary]

In every class? Why not just give uniformed security in schools quick access to weapons, and an easy system of alarms. Any nut job who intends to commit suicide anyway isn't going to be deterred by the fact that there may be one armed person in a particular class. Plus, paying someone to live another life would be kind of expensive.

[Domino]

I think that, if a nutjob knows that everyone on campus is armed, he might just decide to be his only victim. At the least, they'll have to pick a target, instead of assuming they'll be able to gun down everyone they find.

In any case, I don't believe that everyone should be rendered defenseless for fear of what a nutjob might do. It certainly doesn't seem to stop the nutjobs from acquiring arms or moving around.

[Anmon]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary In every class? Why not just give uniformed security in schools quick access to weapons, and an easy system of alarms. Any nut job who intends to commit suicide anyway isn't going to be deterred by the fact that there may be one armed person in a particular class. Plus, paying someone to live another life would be kind of expensive.

Not every class, just two on the whole campus will do, very undercover, their closest student friends not to have the slightest idea that they are really well trained security posing as students.

[another day]

Quote by: Anmon Not every class, just two on the whole campus will do, very undercover, their closest student friends not to have the slightest idea that they are really well trained security posing as students.

Yeah, and their "security training" will turn them into constant vigilantes... having not much to do on a day to day basis they will start ratting on students for using drugs, eavesdropping on every conversation, spying on "potential assailants"... all kinds of infringements on rights will ensue if you put "state spys" undercover in every walk of life. Sorry, but i'll not trade my freedom for security. Besides that it's a ridiculous and absurd plan that would not even work. Who's to say these two undercover guards will be anywhere nearby when the shooting starts? University campuses are big places.

The fact is, this kind of thing by nature is completely unpredictable. All we can try to do is start fixing the society that produces this type of crime, and keep guns out of the hands of known psych patients.

[Milton Bradley]

Hmmm, since liability is such a huge issue on State campuses, perhaps the State shouldn't be in the business of education.


Why, you ask?


For precisely the reasons another day just outlined in the previous post. We're beisg asked ( told ) to trade liberty, for security. ( Which, in the end, cannot be garunteed anyway. )

[Anmon]

=another day;495812]Yeah, and their "security training" will turn them into constant vigilantes...

You seem to be assuming I am talking about students who have undertaken security training, this is not the case, they are already trained agents posing as students.

having not much to do on a day to day basis they will start ratting on students for using drugs, eavesdropping on every conversation,

They will have plenty to do, being a student for one, means keeping up that appearance so as to fool every one, I doubt they will pass on info to the police about drugs as this could compromise their position if students suspected it was them, they are not planted there to drug bust students, but to identify potential assailants, and be ready for them should they go over the top, this would mean they would have to be careful not to alarm the potential assailant by following him around or anything, if he's going to do it, he will and they cant be everywhere at once, but they can take him down once he starts and thus limit the collateral damage.

spying on "potential assailants"...

As I covered, potential assailants could be discussed in private off campus, but not harassed followed, spied on with any means, or handed over to the police on suspicion only.
Basically this is not, and never has been intended to be a plan to save every students life in the event of a maniac(s) wrecking their revenge on them, just to hopefully be on campus when it occurs so there is someone trained to take this guys(s) out asap thus limiting student deaths.
The last thing one of these gutless psychos are going to expect as they walk around knowing and helped by all the safety procedures taught to students by the nanny state, which are don't get in the way of danger, do not try to save anyones life, wait for the authority's, hide under your desk in a defenseless position (apparently these wackos will never think of looking there) is a well trained and armed agent who looks like a student taking them out from a position out of their sight or within their sight if left with no choice, with a few well aimed shots clear to the head( the nutters could be possibly wearing Kevlar armour)

all kinds of infringements on rights will ensue if you put "state spys" undercover in every walk of life. Sorry, but i'll not trade my freedom for security.

The old slippery slide argument doesn't work sorry, what freedom are you exchanging to have some agents on the ready for this situation, unless your a psychotic nut job wanting to slaughter unarmed students yourself?
I have said these agents are not there for spying on students for anything, just to be ready if a columbine type situation occurs again.

Besides that it's a ridiculous and absurd plan that would not even work.

Spoken like a true pessimist, it would work a lot better than having no one ready, and placed on campus to deal with the situation at all wouldn't it?

Who's to say these two undercover guards will be anywhere nearby when the shooting starts? University campuses are big places.

I'm aware of that, and like I said, this was never intended to stop in its tracks every possible killing, just to limit the damage asap.

The fact is, this kind of thing by nature is completely unpredictable. All we can try to do is start fixing the society that produces this type of crime, and keep guns out of the hands of known psych patients.

And what factors do you see in society that are producing these psychos that calmly just walk into schools or offices and start to blow people away?