A New Precedent for Would Be Shooting Victims

In the weeks and months following a horrific crime like the one committed on the campus of Virginia Tech many are left trying to answer unsolvable questions. What drove Seung-Hui Cho to commit such a monstrous act? What could have been done to prevent him from carrying out such evil deeds? What can we do to prevent future occurrences? After much deliberation, investigation and general turmoil it will most likely be determined that the answers to those questions are who knows, not much, and nothing, respectively. We will never know what drove Cho to take the lives of innocent students and faculty. With the laws on the books as they are today there wasn't much the administrators at Virginia Tech could have done to isolate or expel Cho from attending the university. Let's face it; if someone is motivated to take a life and is willing to give their own in the process, there is little anyone can do to prevent it.

So out of this tragedy must come some tangible, positive lesson practiced by future unfortunate participants in similar circumstances. A new precedence must be set so future Cho's will be unsuccessful in their attempts to exact as much pain and terror as possible. A similar precedent was set by the heroes of United Flight 93, hijacked en route to California and diverted to a course destined to wipe out one of our nation's symbols of democracy. The difference between the passengers of United Flight 93 and those on other doomed flights is that this group was warned of the consequences of their inaction. They knew their fate was in the hands of these terrorists, and they refused keep it that way.

After April 16, 2007 we have all been warned of the consequences of our inaction. Prior to that day the acceptable protocol for dealing with a madman with a gun was cooperation in the interest of self-preservation. To intervene was an automatic death sentence. In a way, we have all been conditioned for this response since kindergarten. If someone says something ugly, ignore them. If you are threatened, tell the teacher. If someone wants to fight, walk away. Hijackers cannot count on this cooperation in future attempts thanks to those who decided to fight back on September, 11^th. Hostage-takers should not count on this behavior in future close-quarter shooting attempts.

While it is unpleasant to talk about, it is something that needs to be talked about with our kids, and with each other. Now obviously you shouldn't attempt to tell your 7 year-old how to disarm a gunman, but you should prepare your kids in high school and college. Ask them how they would handle themselves if a Seung-Hui Cho shouldered his way in to their classroom and began unloading a weapon on fellow classmates. Ask them not so they sit around in a constant state of fear, but that they sit around in a constant state of readiness. If you have a plan to act you are less likely to freeze and become another victim. You have been re-conditioned to better handle this kind of emergency. Talk through various strategies such as holding a desk or chair in front of them and storming the gunman. Discuss various ways to restrain using belts, power cords, and other things readily available in a classroom setting. Educate these young adults in basic first aid (applying a tourniquet, treating victims in shock, etc.). These ideas can be delivered subtly while driving to school or catching a ball game. The point is to get these tactics in to their consciousness so hopefully they will never have to act on them.