This morning, I talked to Littlest Guy (my 10 year old) about the shootings at Virginia Tech. He’d seen the paper, and knew the basic facts.
I explained first that while it got a lot of attention, it wasn’t something I worried about a lot, and that he was more at risk from bees than he is from mad killers like this. I told him that nonetheless it was a good idea for him to imagine what he’d do if something like this happened, so that he could know that he isn’t ever helpless.
Later, I talked to a friend who is a University police officer about it, and got this response (the author is a law enforcement officer at a major urban university who will have more to say about the response at VPI tomorrow):
What do you tell your college bound child about crime, danger and self-preservation?
Recognize that a University is just a city within a city, filled with people. Some are good, some are bad, some are there to take advantage of the environment for profit and others, to prey upon a particularly vulnerable population.
By vulnerable, I include students, staff and faculty, all of whom tend to believe the hype about the University Community being somehow insulated from the crime that exists outside the borders. By design, Universities are filled with idealists wishing to take the higher road of understanding and compassion when it comes to dealing with the dangers people often pose toward their own species.
Tell your son or daughter that in order to decrease the risks hidden behind the school’s marketing facade, they must listen to their instincts when confronted with danger, rather than letting their intellect and ideals overcome them. A student needs to be willing to see danger when it presents itself. They need to understand that bad things happen to good people every day, even in places that are supposed to be safe. That all of nature survives and thrives upon decisions of fight or flight, but fails or dies if they succumb to the immobility of fear.
Unfortunately, we live in a would-be virtual world, where we protect our children from fear and leave them to practice their survival skills in games that allow them to respawn when they make the wrong choice. This leaves them believing that they cannot come to harm and although I don’t think walking around riddled with anxiety over every potential encounter is healthy; skepticism, caution and adaptability to swiftly changing circumstances are excellent tools for long term survival.
To be more specific, if something doesn’t look right, it probably isn’t and you should report your concerns to the authorities. If someone seems irrational, delusional or just plain weird, let someone know. If someone seems to believe you have a romantic relationship and you don’t – be alert and report stalking or obsessive behavior as soon as you encounter it. Sometimes, if these situations are caught early, the subject can be helped with medical intervention. Do not put embarrassment above safety.
Most importantly, if you find yourself in an active shooter situation and you can access real shelter or cover, waste no time running full speed in that direction. If you are trapped, in a room with an assailant who is picking off victims as he/she finds them, FIGHT. Throw things, big things if you can grab them. Use that as a distraction to assault the shooter. Go down fighting if you must, but do not let yourself be immobilized by fear. Unless you can hide among the bodies and successfully play dead (a risky tactic if the assailant decides on a ‘coup de grace’ shot), you may as well go down fighting. If you cower in a corner or under a desk, as soon as he sees you he will kill you. Take the initiative away. You have nothing to lose in this situation. Remember the lesson of 9/11, submission to an adversary bent on killing plays into his expectations and will likely result in your death.
Update: changed formatting to distinguish the author’s words from mine.
A.L.
I just to have to comment because this is the first – and perhaps the only time ever – when I completely agree with everything you wrote.
Yes, children these days are way too coddled and insulated from the realities of life. They can handle much more information concerning harsh realities if it is presented to them in pespective and with the proper intent.
Growing up on a horse farm, my children (like many farm kids) were exposed to things that would be considered by the parents of their city dwelling peers to be psychologically damaging. Just one of many examples: my son helping trying to pull a foal born with contracted syndrome out of the mare, watching the foal die and then having to hold the mare while the foal – now dead and stuck half way out – was sawed in half and then futher diced in an attempt (successful) to save the mare. He was 8 or 9 at the the time.
Even shooting ground hogs – necessary to prevent injury to horses in the pasture – was a good experience for the kid. In addition to honing marksmanship, it taught him about the solemn nature of death and killing at an early age. A ground hog hit by a .22 magnum acts pretty much like a person hit by an assualt rifle round.
These things teach the fragility of life and the proximity of death. And in some way hard to explain, they lighten the heart as opposed to twisting or hardening it.
Finally, I couldn’t agree more with the practice of teaching children situational awareness and selection of appropriate response option.
Good luck with your sons A.L., it sounds like your giving them the tools they need to be successful.
immobility of fear
Isn’t that the premise behind self-defense courses, coaching you to overcome the immobility of fear, a fear which may be instinctual.
Years ago, a large dog launched itself at me, I froze – no scream, no flight, no crouching, nothing. When a friend quickly approached, the dog backed off.
We forget how quickly events can unfold. The men and women on Flight 11 had time to overcome the immobility of fear and formulate a response.
My first thought was “THROW CHAIRS!!!” Break into his OODA loop, and break your fellow students out of their indecision. If he turns to leave, chase him and turn a retreat into a rout. People will follow a leader even into gunfire. He was expecting passivity, they were expecting a lecture. They didn’t get what they expected; make sure he doesn’t either.
A fire extinguisher is also an excellent weapon, combining long-distance incapacitation with short-rage blunt force.
I think the other lesson to keep in mind that is being bred out of our culture is that nobody is coming to help you. Dont expect the cops to be just around the corner, odds are they wont get there in time to save your life. No fault of their own, its just reality.
I really do think it comes back to the anti-gun mentality that we empower a big powerful government to take care of us because we arent capable (or trustworthy enough) to take care of ourselves, and hence when the crap hits the fan we should sit tight and wait for the authority to arrive and fix things. Anybody that has seen how government responds to a crisis should be terrified of that mentality. This isnt an illusion- in Europe where the socialist mentality is much further embedded there is crime tolerated in public that would never fly in America. Citizens simply have been told their whole lives that not only is it not their responsibility to intervene, but in fact to do so would be morally wrong in itself. A cowboy mentality, as they say.
I agree that self-defense under desparate circumstances is the way to go. But the accounts I read suggest that things happened so quickly — such a tremendous element of surprise — that one should be careful not to second-guess anyone involved.
I had heard that a Glock semi-automatic is almost like a hand-held machine gun (OK, OK, semi, not full auto), and one of the TV news programs showed someone firing a Glock as fast as he could pull the trigger, and the rate the Glock could cycle to allow another trigger pull was fast. The reason police went to the Glock or similar guns from the traditional service revolver is that even though a semi-automatic introduces a possibility of jams you don’t have with a revolver, the drug dealers and other criminal suspects out there had assault rifle-clones and even illegal full automatics in some cases, and the fire power, magazine capacity, and quick reload of the Glock gave the police a fighting chance on the mean streets.
We like to think there are things we can do to save ourselves in similar (but rare) circumstances, but events unfolded so quickly that the victims didn’t even know what happened to them. Given the people barricading doors and escaping through windows, I think the men and women of VPI showed tremendous resourcefulness under desparate circumstances.
Paul, I own a Glock. It’s an ordinary semi-auto, and like all of them, it cycles much faster than you can physically pull the trigger, and you can of course pull the trigger much faster than you can aim. The difference between that and a double-action revolver is pretty small for the first 6 shots.
Obviously, it’s much easier to reload than a revolver.
But it’s an ordinary handgun like millions of others, nothing “machine gun” about it.
I don’t think anyone is disparaging or criticising the heroics exhibited on that day, AL wants to know what you tell your kid today…. in the aftermath. I happen to own a Glock 19, similar to the one used in the shootings. I am a pretty good shot. If I am firing at moving targets with the speed to make it operate like an automatic weapon, I am not going to have a high hit rate unless my targets have crowded together and ceased moving. Even then, I will be reloading alot. If you can engage your mind through the shock and the fear you will have a chance to fight. And one more thing for others to remember: getting hit by gunfire does not mean you are dead….stay in the fight as long as you are concious. GET MAD.
Paul — the reason police depts. went to the Glock was:
1. It was far lighter on your hip because much of it is polymer not steel.
2. See above: corrosion resistant, not trivial in humid places and pressed up against a sweaty body.
3. Glock’s “safe action” is easier to fire (consistent and lighter trigger pull) than either the DA/SA autos like the Smith & Wessons or DA revolvers (compare even the NY+ Glock trigger at 12 pounds vs. the DA revolver pull of 25 lbs).
4. Extensive marketing by Glock as guns reached their 25 year duty life.
None of these address “firepower” concerns though it is far easier to reload a semi-auto by inserting a new magazine than it is to reload a revolver even with moonclips etc.
Lost in this is that these guns (the Walther 22 and Glock 19) are not cheap. I’d guesstimate the guns ran $1200 total at least for the shooter. Where did he get the money?
“….Dont expect the cops to be just around the corner…”
So true. Cops are undertakers. They’ll come after you’re dead and put yellow tape around the blood pool.
I have a hard time understanding people, who when having a problem, rely on the police to save them. This includes people being stalked, battered women and people in a home being experienceing a break in.
In the two former situations, the perp is not likely to experience any reprecussions of consequence and may well become vengeful and more likely to act out violence. In the later instance, by the time the cops arrive, something bad may have happened to the the innocent.
The instance that police are the only ones who can legitimately handle dangerous situations is both a method of societal control by the powers that be and a symptom of our over urbanized over materialistic soft corporate consumer culture. Ultimately, it is a symptom of the attempt – largely successful – to neuter members of society.
Liberals contribute to this phenomenon because they a overly feminine in their perspective and conservatives are to blame becuase they wish to expand the scope of power of the police state.
Evidently this young man’s behavior had been disturbing his classmates for some time. In 2005, a judge signed a TDO (temporary detaining order) because he appeared to be a threat to himself or others. He was kept the maximum number of hours, assessed and then let go.
I’m no psychiatrist, but I suspect that this guy may have been a schizophrenic. For awhile, I volunteered at a day home for the mentally ill, and met many sad cases of people whose lives had been mowed down by this strange disorder. Of course, they didn’t go around shooting people, either.
However, they were bizarre, distrustful, adn it was often hard to keep them taking medication. They know now if you get this disorder treated at the first sign of it, the damage is minimal. However, it sounds like he was deteriorating for quite some time.
He was the right age for schizophrenia, which often shows up in late high school or college age. One guy I knew had to leave medical school when, as he said, bitterly, “my brain broke.”
I haven’t seen any commentary on this, and I don’t want to psychologize a killing spree, but otoh, I think it’s harmful to see it as random and meaningless.
As anyone who’s been to college knows, you meet lotsa weird ducks. How do you know which ones are lethal? Two years ago, my sun’s friend brought his shotgun back from Sprink Break and killed himself in his room. No reason…he called his roommate and told him to call the police. He hung up and pulled the trigger.
Adam and my son and some other kids went down into the steam tunnels a few times. Strictly forbidden, of course, but that’s just an incentive. After he died, my son took Adam’s backpack and a few things down to the tunnels and left him a memorial. Two years later, he wrote this poem:
Happy Saint Patrick’s Day, Adam. Be at peace.
I cannot write a fitting epitaph
For you, my friend; I fear that I would not
Do justice to the sad and lonely path
That culminated in a single shot.
No one else could share the load you bore,
No one could drive the demons from your mind
Because you never let us past the door
Where all the secret monsters were confined.
So what’s to say, my friend? I wish I knew
The words to use so that I could explain
The torture that no comfort could undo,
The only way you had to end the pain.
Instead, I seek a passage underground
Like Orpheus, on the road of endless night
To Hades, nightmare figures all around
Consumed by flame and shadow’s hellish might.
And soon I reach the wall of ancient clay,
Those bricks you fought with fists of dust and ash
But never broke, and never found what lay
Beyond the wall, on that forgotten path.
And here I’ll leave those things I have of yours
To mark this spot–a shrine, I guess you’d say.
For when I think of you, I think of doors,
The walls we build to lock ourselves away.
But now I have to let this heartache go,
And say farewell from where I am below:
“This isn’t much–and yet I’ve done my best;
I hope your final journey brought you rest.”
____________
Sorry to be so long.
Actually, a good double-action revolver will have a trigger pull of maybe 12 pounds.
dymphna, that’s a lovely, but sad, poem.
While I too think Cho was clearly insane, he seemed highly functional. This morning I heard demands for mental health screenings before admission to college. As if we could know another’s thoughts, as if someone like Cho would ever let a screener “past the door.”
Further to Paul and Rob and Jim, some personal experience to calibrate the discussion on handguns, and maybe enable some reverse engineering on the VT tragedy:
Both my wife and I shoot 9mm Glocks (the large frame versions, a 17 and 34). Since our normal range practice drill consists of one of the NRA standard courses of fire, I can tell you that we’re both capable of putting 5 decently aimed rounds in 10 seconds onto a single man sized target at 25 feet, using either hand. It’s OK, but it’s hardly the rate of fire of a real automatic.
That’s probably a good deal better than the average civilian owner of a defensive handgun, and based on what I’ve seen at the range, probably no worse than than your average sworn officer. It’s nowhere NEAR as good as a competitive handgun shooter, who can achieve accurate rates of fire better than one per second.
Getting to our level took about 20 months of practice, once every 4-6 weeks. Maintaining it takes practice every two to three months (we’re due).
The VT nutter bought his Glock five weeks before the atrocity. It’d be interesting to know whether he did any range time with it, but I can assure you he didn’t become a particularly proficient shooter in that time. To me that implies he was firing at nearly pointblank range at either groups or stationary targets, who weren’t doing much to distract him. Not trying to make any judgment on that, just observing.
Another question is type of ammo. One of the raps on the 9mm is that it has little ‘stopping power’ compared to larger calibers such as .45 or 357 mag. The tradeoff is that you’d typically need lengthier and more frequent practice to consistently control the recoil of a ‘major’ caliber compared to something like the 9mm. If you’re not particularly into the gun thing, but want to be a responsible and reasonably practiced gun owner, that counts in favor of the 9mm.
A way around the tradeoff in a defensive situation is to shoot what’s called JHP ammo – that’s jacketed hollow point, with a heavier than normal powder load. Hollow points are designed to expand when they hit a flesh-and-blood target, transferring maximum energy to that target. If you bought a 9mm for defensive purposes and got good advice, you’ve likely got a magazine loaded up with JHP in case you ever have to use it defensively. I do, and hope to never use it. So no gun dealer is going to blink if you buy 50-100 rounds of JHP along with the pistol, part for familiarization and reliability testing, and part against the unhoped-for day.
That’s not what you fire at the range, though, unless you’re made of money, because the suckers are expensive. Instead you buy a bunch of FMJ (full metal jacket) ‘range ammo’. That’s copper clad, not particular expansive (or expensive). It would just bore bloody holes through the soft parts of a human target – little knock down power. Works fine for perforating paper and cardboard, though.
It’s not unusual to buy 1000+ rounds of FMJ range ammo, if you can find a good deal. (Work it out: 100 rounds per practice session x 2 people x 5 times a year – for me it’s worth getting the quantity discount.) So buying a case won’t really mean much to an ammo dealer, other than you believe in practicing and are cheap. (Buying up a whole case of JHP, OTOH, might be considered a bit eccentric, though of course there are those who will pay the extra $ to practice with exactly what’s they’d fire in a crisis situation.)
So, what was the shooter loaded up with? If it was FMJ, again he’d likely have been at close range for that many kills, probably many of them (ugh…) head shots. If he had a pile of JHP, that might explain the kills, but I’d ask some questions about where he got it.
As far as the Glock brand, it’s one of the most popular ones in America, particularly for defensive uses. Other than good marketing, one of the reasons (as Jim says) is that each trigger pull is identical in weight, which is not the case with many actions. Useful if you don’t practice a lot and/or would likely have to use it under maximum stress – you want to ingrain just one habit. Again, buying one of these is common, not odd.
Re the Walther 22, there’s no way that buying something like that would register as an issue. A 22 pistol is for practice and plinking. The ammo is the cheapest you can get. 22 ammo is typically bought in ‘bricks’ of 500 rounds since it’s cheap and for practice – so buying that much would surprise no one at all.
The low power of a 22 means it’s not usually immediately lethal to anything bigger than a squirrel (which you can’t hit anyway because he’s at 50 yards and your typical pistol isn’t accurate beyond 50 feet). A 22 can be ultimately lethal to a human, but usually due to internal bleeding or sepsis. It would take a point blank or (un)lucky hit to a vital spot for an immediate kill with a 22.
So, net net, this bit of airchair analysis supports the notion that the nutter didn’t face much if any active resistance. Further, the kit he bought (as far as known today) isn’t at all out of the norm for someone wanting to become a decent and safe hand gun shooter, for either defensive or target shooting purposes. Tightening the gun regs enough to have DQed him would have the same effects on a very large swath of legitimate users.
If there are changes implied, I’d tend to support those who are looking at the buyer, though he apparently appeared ‘normal’ and not memorable to those who sold to him. The two potential tripwires there would be mental state, and having a home address in a dorm that didn’t allow firearms of any sort. I leave it to other threads re whether tests that would have caught those are acceptable intrusions.
Sorry for the length, but I thought some backgrounding would be useful. Errata or different opinions from those with experience invited…
Tim, all this talk about “stopping power” is pretty much nonsense for discussion by the hot stove league, in my opinion.
In the 20th and 21st centuries, far more people have been killed by full metal jacket rounds than by fancy expensive hollow points.
This talk is similar to that I have heard regarding the M16 as not outright killing the enemy. It’s all hog wash. When the M16 doesn’t drop an enemy immediately – which it most often does with some devasting wounds apparent – there are 2 explanations; 1, the shooter missed the vital organs (if not the target entirely) 2. the target was simply one of those rare individuals who, by combination of mentality, body/brain chemistry at the that moment, physical structure and, perhaps, narcotics ingestion, was able to keep on his feet after being shot. In such a case even a heavier round, say a 7.62mm, probably would not have stopped him either (and there are many instances where 30 ball/7.62mm took several hits to drop a man in combat.
If you doubt this, take a look at after action reports leading to the awarding of the Navy Cross/Medal of Honor to USMC personnel. Many of the recepients soaked up a number of hits from 30 cal or larger weapons and still managed to achieve their objective before succumbing to their wounds.
The fact is that no round from a hand held, shoulder fired weapon will blast a targeted man to the ground every time.
Same is true with handguns. Many many people have been killed by handgun rounds now considered “underpowered” such as the 32s, 38s and 9mms.
The keys to stopping a target with any hand held weapon are; 1. shot placement (i.e. hit a vital organ or the spine/head) and 2. mutiple hits.
Anyone who tells you it can be otherwise is either ignorant or trying to sell you something.
That being said, more power is better and, against unarmored targets, hollow points/soft points are better.
But a 9mm ball round through the center of mass will definitely be lethal. Multiple hits, such as the victims of Virginia Tech experienced are almost 100% guaranteed lethal. Finally, even a 22 is lethal if a vital organ is hit, especially the brain.
Avedis, we agree more than not.
If you look at one of my tentative conclusions, it’s exactly that the nutter was able to place multiple rounds on critical targets, even being quite inexperienced. Ergo, he was likely firing at short range against little opposition and fixed targets. (There is also a mobile phone eyewitness video kicked around the net. >Assuming< the shots heard on that were from the perp, let's say rate of fire was not an issue as suggested above.) Secondarily, I'm suggesting that the arms and ammo he purportedly bought (AFAIK at this point) weren't at all out of line for what a normal handgun shooter would be buying. He wouldn't have profiled as some sort of nutjob on the basis of his purchases alone. Maybe the digression on hollow points and the like was just that. I was trying to get around to why a 9mm is quite common, and indirectly why type and quantity of ammo might indicate something about intent, but without invoked the whole 9 vs. 45, 'tupperware guns', semi-autos vs. revolvers etc., cans o' worms. So much for that goal, as I stepped on the hollow point land mine whilest trying to avoid the others. Going further with that aspect is likely wide of the main point of the thread. For those wondering what the heck we're talking about, a minor amount of googling will turn up more discussion/flamage than you can imagine. Suffice it to say that once you get past the overriding pro/anti issue on guns, you can find an amazing range of opinions. Guns are sort of like cars - they have their uses, if you screw up you can kill yourself or others, and everyone's got an opinion.
“..If you look at one of my tentative conclusions, it’s exactly that the nutter was able to place multiple rounds on critical targets, even being quite inexperienced…”
Right. Exactly. Most people, even if trained, just start firing widely in the heat of combat.
This pyscho was calm, cool and collected. He took time to aim and that’s what made the difference in the ratio of shots fired to kills (as it always does).
That’s quite a big subject to talk about with your 10 year old. I’m impressed. I wouldn’t dare to start explaining that to my 7 year old. He’ll probably keep asking “Why did they had guns?”