![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
I found this picture on the Chicago tribune site. It's actually rather interesting because until this I had figured he was actually going down the halls and entering random classes (as the news had generally phrased it) to shoot up the place. But looking at the picture it looks like all the classrooms were in one place and he didn't really walk anywhere. It's a very informative image so is there any way we could included it with out breaking copyright laws?-- Reyals 17:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Can we use it as a reference for text? The data it provides - the layout of the classrooms - is something that I haven't seen in the article or any other news outlet. Surely it's somewhere else as well, but this is the only thing we've got at the moment. -- Kizor 11:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
The second paragraph says that "[the murderer] committed suicide upon hearing the police during the second attack". Please, remove the "upon hearing the police" part, because we certainly don't know what prompted the murderer to kill himself. (Note the timelime in this article: "the shooter is dead before police arrive".) Our police "heroes" apparently had ZERO impact on the outcome of this event---so, attempting to give them half-assed credit for the shooter's suicide is certainly nothing more than apologist speculation. However, even if the police had arrived two hours earlier, we wouldn't know the killer's motivation.
This discussion is still in relative chaos. I'm combining some sections for ease of reading and clarity. If wrong, slap with fish. -- Kizor 08:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Anyone have any information on how he posted his attack on 4chan's /b/ thread? ( http://www.thestar.com/article/204030) has some information on it, but I was wondering if anyone could find other sources mentioning it and add it to the main article. -Stexe 71.225.125.176 05:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/204030
"Students at the university's online newspaper, planetblacksburg.com, today discovered a message on a website that seemed to announce the massacre.
Posted early yesterday morning on 4chan, a website that allows anonymous postings, the message warned: "hey /b/ I'm going to kill people at vtech today in the name of anonymous.""
Should this be in there somewhere? 66.169.45.213 23:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
No, the warning was actually written almost 7 hours AFTER the shooting took place. The link provided above is to a gossip newspaper.
CINEGroup
23:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok. I just found it while surfing the web. I didn't do any research. Sorry.
Straight from a strong hideout of Asian deviants I found this quote "311 Name: Anonymous : 2007-04-17 21:22 ID:VCXrJzcr
"hey /b/ I'm going to kill people at vtech today in the name of anonymous."" Is the FBI watching this??? WHY WON"T THEY DO ANYTHING!!!!
the do watch 4chan the fbi responded to a bomb treat for some football game that never would of existed and now some guy is serving a jail sentence. however with a hundred thousand or so annon posts these forums are unmanageable for the authority's 4chan is not a reliable source
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.27.18.25 ( talk) 01:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC).
Here's a reliable source : thestar.com. And la times says that he posted "im going to kill people at vtech today" on a forum.-- PseudoChron 01:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Um, thestar.com is the URL for Canada's best selling newspaper. It is not a gossip paper, it is a leading Toronto daily. 74.12.68.159 02:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)bangthedrum
Both of those articles source the student news site which found the original 4chan post, which we've already confirmed is a hoax and was posted long after the shootings. This topic should be closed from discussion. - Ennuified talk 03:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
This very post actually has been published in this swedish newspaper: http://expressen.se/nyheter/1.642133 (you can see it there), and is in the print-edition as well. pictures will be posted, if it is included in this article sometime, hopefully.
http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0030372 talks about it somewhat. Do we know which drugs the shooter was on? Could this be part of the story? 69.117.70.35 21:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
we read: "Mr. Cho awoke before 5 a.m., then sat down to work on his computer and awakened Mr. Aust in the process. Mr. Grewal, who shares a room in the same suite, saw Mr. Cho in the bathroom shortly after 5 a.m.
As usual, Mr. Cho did not say anything to Mr. Grewal. No good morning, no hello, Mr. Grewal said. Mr. Cho stood in the bathroom, brushing his teeth, wetting his contact lenses and applying a moisturizer.
He also took a prescription medicine. Neither Mr. Aust nor Mr. Grewal knew what the medicine was for, but officials said prescription medications related to the treatment of psychological problems had been found among Mr. Cho’s effects." 201.19.170.38 14:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
A 23 year old man is hardly young or a child. And without some proof, it doesn't belong in an encyclopaedia. Nja247 ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Would it be worth having a section on Jack Thompson and his response? 71.127.199.199 00:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree with Ennuified - not in this article. It may be relevant, however, in Jack Thompson (attorney). -- Chuq (talk) 01:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
There is no credible third-party evidence that the gunman played video games. There is only evidence that Jack Thompson thinks the gunman played video games. So there should be no discussion of the "video games made him do it" theory unless reliable sources show that he was involved in violent gaming. szyslak ( t, c) 03:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thompson's a vulture. Merely mentioning his name might conjure him. Honestly, the points where I agree with him make him far more unsavory than the points where I disagree - he sullies and cheapens all that he touches. Seriously, though, is it really desirable or acceptable to include his commentary, commentary which would surely remove accountability completely from Cho's shoulder's and placing on the things in this country Jack Thompson percieves as "bad influences". I'm not big on violent video games myself, and definitely feel like there are better avenues of recreation, but do we really want the friends and family members of the victims who might read this page to read excerpts of Jack Thompsons contentions that videogames, not a daranged psychopath, killed their children? Long story short - please no. Liquid entropy
the interviewer of the suite mate on msnbc mentioned counter strike several times, another instance of the media blaming video games...maybe some one wants to add this or address it in greater length
additionally if you want the Rutgers University response, I can get the email the president sent out.
Does anyone know of any significance to this name.
It is now being reported that the term was actually AX ISHMAEL. 151.213.177.128 23:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)gnoko
ISMAIL AX, obviously is an anagram for SALAMI XI (salami eleven) 207.118.168.114 03:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
According to one website, ISHMAEL means "God will hear." This appears to fit with his manifesto to NBC.
There's a typo in the article -- whatever the real spelling, "Ismale" is wrong. Mergy 11:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
My personal interpretation (for all that's worth) is that he is using Ishmael to refer to a rejected outsider who wanders the earth. This is how critics interpret the significance of the name in
Moby Dick.
Paladinwannabe2
14:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
[[:Image:Frontpage18april.jpg|thumb| The Sydney Morning Herald front page April 18, 2007.]] suggestion to remove the picture from the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald, which seems to suggest a relationship either current or prior with the first victim, Emily, which was later stated to be not true. it appeared that Cho was obsessed with the girl and that they had no prior relationship note: i deleted the picture which contains the misleading and contradictory headline YanShen 10:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Mind, it is relevant that Emily was first assumed to be a girlfriend and reported as such. This should be (and is) covered in the text, and the front page could illustrate media response. -- Kizor 11:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Is Emily's (the first victim) roomate's name relevant. Because i think i might have it. she is listed in the article as having talked to the police and having suggested the wrong person (eg: Emily's boyfriend) - Joetheguy 13:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure leaving out the qualifying peace-time in describing this as the largest mass shooting in the lead is accurate. I'm fairly sure there were larger incidents during times of insurrection, Civil War, Bleeding Kansas, Mormon wars, etc. The massacre at Ft. Pillow is one such example. Ronnotel 14:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
It really seems to be extending to a ridiculous degree. The timeline, in particular, is too spaced out, and stretches the article. The Response section also seems over-the-top - I mean, come on, Sporting Tributes? I'm not trying to be mean, but I don't think that belongs here. Snorgle 15:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
It seems appropriate that there be a comparison between this section and the separate article Cho Seung-hui. It appears that this section is much larger than normal for a teaser summary. (This section also could offer improvements for the main article.) Changes probably need to stablize first or the cross editing could be very difficult. Any thoughts? -- Lmcelhiney 17:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Is the April 2nd bomb threat relevant as part of the timeline... especially since it then says the person who called it in is unknown -- Elg26 17:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Police never reported that the motive was a domestic dispute between Cho and his ‘girlfriend’ Emily Hilscher. This seems to be a miss-reported combination of facts -- that the police initially thought Hilscher’s boyfriend was the killer, and that the killer turned out to be Cho.
I suggest changing the line in ‘Possible Motive’ to the following:
Early reports suggested that the killing was the result of a domestic dispute, but this was based on the fact that the first victim, Emily Hilscher, had spent the weekend with boyfriend, Karl Thornhill, who was known to own guns. As police located and questioned Thornhill, the second shooting began. It was at that time investigators realized their initial theory was incorrect.
At this time, Cho is not known to have a connection to Hilscher. Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3052279&page=1
I'm a new user, so I can't make this change myself.
Not a registered user, so can't make the changes myself, but at the moment, we have:
9 mm Glock 19 and a .22 caliber Walther P22 handgun.[30] Cho purchased the 9 mm Glock 19 at Roanoke Firearms[31] on March 13, 2007, and the .22-caliber handgun was purchased February 9 at a pawnshop in Blacksburg.[32]
Where the references are:
Reference 30 names the Glock, but simply says "a .22 caliber handgun" for the other; reference 31 doesn't mention the guns at all, and reference 32 gives details on both. The way the citations are used in this passage is therefore clearly wrong, since, with the exception of reference 32, they don't support the statement they're attatched to.
My suggestion would be to remove reference 31 altogether, and to quote reference 30 and 32 together at the end of the passage. With the citations done nicely, that looks like this:
Officials believe he used a 9 mm Glock 19 and a .22 caliber Walther P22 handgun. Cho purchased the 9 mm Glock 19 at Roanoke Firearms on March 13, 2007, and the .22-caliber handgun was purchased April 13, 2007 at a pawnbroker in Blacksburg [1] [2].
If anyone wants to cut and paste that, that would be helpful.
-- Tom Anderson 2007-04-18 18:55 +0100
should we put up pictures of the victims? Mercenary2k 17:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
No. They aren't notable, let alone their pictures. Titanium Dragon 18:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I vote we delete the picture of the kids hiding. Not only is it creepy beyond on reason, it also serves no real purpose.
H2P (
Yell at me for
what I've done)
04:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
There should be more about the Facebook response in this article, considering this is a college event and almost every student uses it.
There's a group: "A tribute to those who passed at the Virginia Tech Shooting [5]" which has 230,000 members. Including 1800 pictures that combine the VT black ribbon with their school logo and the words "Today, we are all Hokies"
Someone should also mention the history of this black VT ribbon because it is now being used by almost every student at VT as their facebook picture. [6] -- Bbabul01 19:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
If anyone is inclined or interested, here are some mainstream media reports about the the use of social networking and similar tools in relation to these events:
(Links shamelessly stolen from Gary Stager - but there are others out there if anyone cares to look!) -- ElKevbo 20:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please reduce the number of citations for this section. There has to be a single source by now that lists these so that the whole section can be given ONE citation. Is it really necessary for some of the victims to have 3 citations? 129.237.2.66 19:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, but that does not answer the question as to why we don't just give the whole section a citation instead of every single victim. I am saying that the section is difficult to read because of excessive, redundant, citations. 129.237.2.66 19:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Its not necessary to have a victims setion at all; Wikipedia is neither a place for lists nor for memorials, and the list of victims has no encyclopedic value. Titanium Dragon 19:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
No need to have this debate in two places; it is already under debate here.↔ NMajdan• talk 20:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't really know how to do it, but currently the first two references in the "University response" section are in a different style than the rest. I'm also not even sure if this is really important or not, but I figured I point it out. Jauerback 20:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
In Australia and the UK, the vast majority of articles reporting on the topic include condemnations of the US gun culture (including one by John Howard, so it is not only media, but also the governments). The pro-gun people here will probably not want to include it, but by and large (in Australia and the UK at least) the international response has been the revival of anti-gun discussion. Sad mouse 20:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
'On the other side of the issue, the Conservative Voice contrasted the Virginia Tech massacre with the Appalachian School of Law shooting, which occurred about 130 road miles (210 km) to the west in Grundy, Virginia in 2002, and declared, "All the school shootings that have ended abruptly in the last ten years were stopped because a law-abiding citizen—a potential victim—had a gun."'
This is a case where I feel wikipedia should be more critical. It is correct to report that the Conservative Voice did indeed make that quote. However any quick search brings up examples where school shootings have ended abruptly by police or non-violent means, so it is actually an incorrect statement. Rather than just uncritically repeating quotes, a little thought should go into them to make sure that they are not simply a vehicle for bias. Eg I would suggest '"... and (incorrectly) declared, "All the school shootings that have ended abruptly in the last ten years were stopped because a law-abiding citizen—a potential victim—had a gun."' Sad mouse 20:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd suggest leaving the media section as is. It currently presents boths sides of the issue and in a fair and NPOV way. Trying to poke holes in one side's opinions will open the door to doing the same to the other sides. For example, the section state "The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, an American gun control group, said that it was easy for an individual to get powerful weapons ..." One could easily argue that it isn't easy in this country to get powerful weapons, and provide evidence to back that up (such as by saying that people in Washington DC or NYC, where there are strict gun laws, have difficulty in obtaining powerful weapons). We should merely offer both sides' referenced opinions and let the readers draw their own conclusions. -- Alabamaboy 23:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm currently watching non-live press conference on BBC World that states that the gunman is believed to have sent material to NBC between the first and the second shootings. It's in as much detail as possible at MSNBC. Get this looked at, NOW. (Sorry for not doing this myself, but I'm on break from the article right now, doing creative writing) -- Kizor 21:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
included images, video, writings
mailed BETWEEN the two shootings to Steve Capus, head of NBC News
EDIT: I believe in the video Cho says "This didn't have to happen." speaks of hatred, rambles, lots of profanity (much like his plays). 151.213.177.128 21:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
Apparently Cho, when he went to reload and write the "disturbing note" recorded a video and prompted it be sent to NBC. It was sent to NBC, turned over to police, whom turned it over to FBI. It also came with multi-paged statements. Anyone have any more information?
link to the article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18169776/?GT1=9246 67.107.106.110 21:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
This has been inserted into the timeline at 9:01. Can we get a source for that timestamp? 66.162.41.118 21:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that the hollowed out bullets should be noted as well throughout the article, because this sounds like he used this inhumane method to ensure that people would be killed. From what I recall hollowed out bullets are likely to break on impact and cut through multiple organs, rather than only doing damage in one straight line. I first thought it was odd that he could manage to kill so many people with only 27 shots fired into the German classroom but this changes things because even when he misses, the likelyhood of damage through riccochet is vastly increaased -youngidealist 68.231.200.13 05:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Can someone make the lead bigger? And archive this talk page. 129.120.86.70 21:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Would it be worth including some of the copycat threats? Darrik2 21:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ 151.213.177.128 21:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
VT Killer ruled a mental defective. He was not legally purchasing his firearms under Federal law. This article acts as though there was no gun control present. The simple fact is, this criminal lied (shocking) and circumvented existing gun control laws.
ref: http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=3052278
The federally prohibitive criteria outlining the reasons an individual may be precluded from the transfer/possession of a firearm or firearm-related permit, pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C., §§ 922 (g) and (n), are as follows:
[...]
A person adjudicated mental defective or involuntarily committed to a mental institution or incompetent to handle own affairs, including dispositions to criminal charges pertaining to found not guilty by reason of insanity or found incompetent to stand trial.
ref: http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics.htm
Cut the bias Wikipedia, cut the freaking bias. -- Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 22:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
[8] HalfShadow 22:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
All sources say guns were purchased legally. But you may be right he could have lied and avoided those laws. Billbobjoe 22:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
BBC Radio 4 stated specifically before that since he had voluntarily admitted himself to the mental institution no gun laws had been broken. sure there'll be an online version somewhere. tomasz. 22:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Both shop owners are presumably living people. WP:BLP requires that any potentially negative information about a living person be well sourced. Saying that they illegally sold him the guns is unquestionably inflammatory and unless other media outlets are phrasing it that way, we should not and that language should be removed on sight. In the interest of accuracy, I see no problem with having no adjective at all, but we absolutely should not characterize the sales as illegal. -- BigDT ( 416) 23:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
So far there is nothing to indicate that his gun purchases were made illegally, nor that the normal Virginia gun purchasing process was violated in any way. Wahkeenah 23:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Aaargh! The point is not that he got them legally or illegally - the point was that it was so easy to get a gun! All he had to do was fill out a form (and possibly lie). Here in NZ to get a gun license you can be interviewed, have your family interviewed, have your gun cabinet inspected - it can take months to even get a license! You're saying the law did everything right to prevent this simply by asking him to be nice and tell the truth on his form? There goes than negative gun culture again (pity that this article refuses to document it). 203.97.51.149 01:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0b5_1176937612&p=1
rough transcript of Cho Seung-Hui's media manifesto, which was released by NBC Nightly news
package was sent from an "ishmael" (spelling unknown)
When the time came, I did it. I had to. You had a hundred billion chances and ways to have avoided today. But you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off. You just loved crucifying me. You loved inducing cancer in my head, terrorizing my heart and raping my soul all this time. I didnt have to do this. I could have left. I could have fled. But no. I will no longer run. If not for me, for my children. For my brothers and sisters that you fucked. I did it for them.
Cho also referenced Dylan and Eric as "martyrs" in his media, but this was not shown on TV.
EDIT: more excerpts from NBC News
You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience. You thought it was one pathetic boy’s life you were extinguishing. Thanks to you, I die like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the weak and the defenseless people.
Do you know what it feels to be spit on your face and to have trash shoved down your throat? Do you know what it feels like to dig your own grave? Do you know what it feels like to have throat slashed from ear to ear? Do you know what it feels like to be torched alive? Do you know what it feels like to be humiliated and be impaled upon on a cross? And left to bleed to death for your amusement? You have never felt a single ounce of pain your whole life. Did you want to inject as much misery in our lives as you can just because you can?
You had everything you wanted. Your Mercedes wasn’t enough, you brats. Your golden necklaces weren’t enough, you snobs. Your trust fund wasn’t enough. Your vodka and Cognac weren’t enough. All your debaucheries weren’t enough. Those weren’t enough to fulfill your hedonistic needs. You had everything.
151.213.177.128 23:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
I don't believe he is accusing NBC, in fact it has been stated that these videos do not provide us with any information as to who he is explicitly accusing. 151.213.177.128 01:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)gnoko
EDIT: more from pdf files sent to NBC
Oh the happiness I could have had mingling among you hedonists, being counted as one of you, only if you didn't (fuck) the living (shit) out of me. You could have been great. I could have been great. Ask yourself what you did to me to have made clean the slate. Are you happy now that you have destroyed my life? Now that you have stolen everything you could from me? Now that you have gone on a 9/11 on my life luke (fucking) Osama. Now that you have (fucked) your own people like (fucking) Kim Jong-Il. Now that you have gone on a hummer safari on my life like (fucking) Bush? Are you happy now? All the (shit) you've given me, right back at you with hollow points. Don't you wish you finished me off when you had the chance? Don't you just wish you killed me? Number of the Anti-Terrorist. (drawing of 2 figure-eights) You wanna rape us John Mark Karrs? You wanna rape us Debra LaFaves? (Fuck) you. Let the revolution begin!
75.89.75.106 17:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
A gunman killed 32 people[5] and injured another 29 before committing suicide, making it the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
Attacks
There were two attacks in two buildings. The first was in the West Ambler Johnston building, starting at 7:15 a.m., where two died, and the second at Norris Hall, where 31 died.
Cho is the 31st person that died in Norris Hall. The 32 number is victims only. Chunky Rice 23:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Untruthful (from Webster's):
2. Given to falsehood; mendacious.
"Untruthful Media Reports" seems to imply that the information was purposefully false. It would seem that "Inaccurate Media Reports" would be more, well, accurate - as I'm sure that the early media reports were not purposefully incorrect.
Bobcooley 00:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
24.234.97.79 00:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
This was not the deadliest non-military civilian massacre in US history. The Mountain Meadows Massacre was. Can someone change this, or at least get a source that proves the Virginia Tech shooting as the deadliest. ( KingBurgermon 00:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC))
Huh? Have you read Mountain Meadows Massacre? It was carried out by a militia, and the area was under martial law, and it was a group carrying out the massacre, not a lone gunman. Comparing the two makes no sense at all. Carcharoth 01:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
BTW - here's the earlier discussion and the consensus that was reached. Ronnotel 01:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
How are the ethnicities of the victims relevant? AFAIK no one is claiming this to be a racially motivated attack, so it seems like adding the races/ethnicities of the victims is unecessary. Natalie 00:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
And it keeps getting posted. Kudos to who ever removes it so quickly 67.99.36.75 01:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Over at FreeRepublic, etc., a major initial reaction to the shooting was the assumption that the shooter was a Muslim terrorist, and the writing or tattoo "Ismail Ax" (sic) was seen as conclusive proof of this. Should we include this? Ethan Mitchell 01:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey You all... We don't have much info on Wayne Chiang... The dude who collected weapons and was accused at first... I started a little blurb about him int he "inaccurate media reports" section, prevoisly named "untruthful media reports"... I changed the name and added that section...
I felt that it was too sloppy the parts i added, can you guys help he fix it up? This is the first major edit ive made to a significant event's article...
-- OMGWTFBBQ BLAH 01:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
you may be able to contact him through his livejournal and find more information there, www.livejournal.com/~wanusmaximus
he is a self described shooting enthusiast, a Virginia Tech grad, a former resident of the AJ dorm, and I believe he is Taiwanese. 151.213.177.128 01:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
-- OMGWTFBBQ BLAH 01:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I added the details about the ammunition the shooter used. When I raised it in the discussion previously some pro-gun people thought it didn't warrant mentioning that the 15-bullet magazine he used (allowing him to shoot without reloading as frequently) was illegal until 2004. I think the ammunition is as notable as the guns that he used, and it is certainly relevant to the gun control debate that he would not have had access to the fire power he used if this had occurred prior to 2004. Sad mouse 02:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070418/REPOSITORY/704180366/1013/NEWS03
On April 18, NBC News received a package from Cho timestamped between the first two murders and the rest of the massacre two hours later. It contained a 1,800-word manifesto[50], pictures, and 23 videos.[51] In the videos, sent in QuickTime format , Cho discussed his religion and his hatred of the wealthy.
Radikaos 02:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Is the Mention of Quick Time Really relevant
It is not known what, if any, previous firearm experience or training Cho had completed before the massacre. It is not known where or how Cho obtained the chain with which he locked the doors at the stairway in the engineering classroom building.
Maybe the idea of the chain should be introduced before this, would make for a better flow in the article (personal opinion)
Radikaos 02:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I think the main picture needs to change. All it shows a bunch of students standing around. The iconic picture of this massacre is 4 cops carrying a bloodied student....Thats what is needs to go in the main box Mercenary2k 03:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Go to Commons:Virginia Tech and pick the photo of your choice ... but it has to be free. There's no way that having a non-free photo in the infobox is fair use on a subject like this - because there is an obvious replacement - any free photo. -- BigDT ( 416) 03:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Topeka, KS based hate-fueled Westboro Baptist Church, led by Fred Phelps, plan to "preach" their hate filled message at the funeral's of the VA Tech Massacre victims. These pickets usually consist of signs containing defamatory slogans, such as God Hates F*gs, [subject] are in Hell! (in this case, they would claim the victims are in hell), and others I don't feel are neccessary to repeat here.
The WBC Sites: http://www.godhatesamerica.com http://www.godhatesfags.com
News sites on the picketing plans: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/18/national/main2699800.shtml http://themoderatevoice.com/religion/12273/virginia-tech-protection-needed-as-with-columbine-funerals-and-memorial-services-pastor-fred-is-coming-to-spread-his-screed-at-vt/
Forgive me if I have added this entry wrong. Kennethv 03:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
My personal preference is that I wish we as a country would give them absolutely zero press. If you ignore the school bully, eventually he will go away. At any rate, I don't know that this warrant a mention in this article until there is actually an incident. (No opinion on a mention in the WBC article.)-- BigDT ( 416) 04:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Come now, this is no place for sensationalism. The word 'incident' is more neutral and therefore more appropriate. I'd also be content with 'killing spree', 'murders', 'killings', or 'shootings'. A massacre takes place on a battlefield, not a campus. Vranak
Everyone who is claiming consensus is NOT paying attention. There was no consensus. What happened was someone moved it arbitrarily on the basis of six hours of people voting. That's not how Wikipedia works. I complained about it, and it was decided by a number of people that it will be move locked to prevent constant move wars and disrupting editing of the article. Simply put, the people who have a vested interest in sensationalism are keeping it as massacre. In a week or so, most of them will have wandered off, and we'll probably have a real discussion about the issue. Massacre is a very, VERY non-NPOV term, see Haditha killings, which was changed off of Haditha massacre for NPOV reasons. Basically, to call this a massacre would be biased. It should be named Virginia Tech shootings, with a "if you're looking for 2006 Virginia Tech shootings, blah. Wikipedia has NOT defined massacre, contrary to the claims of random people who don't know what they're talking about. This should be called Virginia Tech shootings, but as I said before, we'll deal with it in a week when the article isn't being edited every minute of every hour of every day. Titanium Dragon 05:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
It's an established name for school shootings. See, for example, Columbine High School massacre, or the whole list. Both terms, shooting and massacre are used. IMO, if you deliberately kill tens of random people after planning it, it's a massacre.-- Svetovid 11:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Titanium Dragon's account matches my recollection: there was no concensus to move it from "shootings" to "massacre," someone just arbitrarily decided to go with it a few hours into a discussion about it. Also, you can't go by Columbine High School massacre -- that article has undergone moves between "massacre" & "shootings" a couple of times over the past couple days too. -- Yksin 16:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Some people are blaming immigration and the cross cultural transition as the reason for the killings.
http://vdare.com/pb/070418_vt.htm
just wondering whether you guys want to include this in the article
Mercenary2k 05:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Here is one theory on what the tattoo means, it's the only one I have seen so far. [11] - Ravedave 05:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I removed the paragraph quoting an Australian psychologist's viewpoint -- I think this kind of distance diagnosis is inappropriate, as it is obvious the commenter never directly assessed the shooter. It has been reinstated by its original contributor. Other viewpoints? Sfmammamia 05:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I agree - its a throwaway comment for a press piece not a reliable comment that deserves to remain in an encylcopedia Phurge 09:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
This section needs to be renamed and encylopedized. Its pretty bad right now. It should probably be integrated inline into the narrative of the attack; it shouldn't be singled out and DEFINITELY shouldn't be called something as POV as "heroic", which is completely inappropriate for an encylopedia. Titanium Dragon 05:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Heroic would of been rushing the attacker to stop him. No one did that. The whole section needs to be eliminated and integrated into the rest of the narrative. Zynkin 06:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, i'm the one who created Heroic acts section. My intention is to record the so-called-heroic act done by the victims and other non-notable students during the massacre, particularly in the case of Lumbantoruan and Zach Petkewicz which is not mentioned in any dedicated article at all. Liviu Librescu and Kevin Granata's heroic acts are recorded in their respective article pages, and I felt the need to acknowledge and record the action of Lumbantoruan, Petkewicz and others, if any, for people who didn't have their own pages dedicated in wikipedia. I agree if the section Heroic act is merged under Norris Hall shootings (If based on consensus), in order to clean it from POV language, but to retain the action and chronology of the event, acknowledging the heroic acts by the non-notable victims. Chaerani 08:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
(New user here so am not sure if I am contributing in the right way/place. Do I mention things here for others to edit or put it in the article myself? For now, am leaving it to those more keen.) There is more information on the French Canadian teacher and her apparent sacrifices in her classroom, which was apparently the hardest-hit with the fewest survivors. Please see this link to The Toronto Star http://www.thestar.com/News/article/204866 . The French class is also apparently where Cho returned for the last time before taking his own life. The significance of these events suggests that they be included under the "shootings" section. (BTW, I have noticed above that someone is calling the TO Star a "gossip" paper. Although this paper seems to have erred in an early detail from 4chan, it has won many awards for investigative reporting and can generally be trusted for solid research. It is the major 7-day weekly paper for Canada's largest city, and its credentials are normally trustworthy - certainly not to be dismissed. Anyway, the story seems worth following up, especially if you're going to include the info on other professors who sacrificed their lives for their students, no matter what section it's put in.) wiki-stikler 17:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I am not too familiar with wikipedia's stance regarding these, so I'm posting them here first since they're in .pdf format:
Hope this helps. - Shirley Grace 06:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I already got enough information on the news, why is their already a wikipedia article on this s***, it makes me sick that their is one. Useless debate, and just adds meaningless talk. I do a search result on this and their is already a wikipedia page UNBELIEVABLE. Wrs888 07:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Okay maybe I understand their needs to be an article but this discussion just adds meaningless talk. This discussion is already talking about "copycats", "deadliest massacre EVAR", religion, gun control or other retarded topics such as "Wikipedia as an Events Calendar". I find that very repulsive. Topics such as that adds nothing to to the discussion other then it being offending and disrespectful, seriously doesn't that offend you? So Valley2City if you're going to call me a noob, then I might as well call you retarded for discussing in a retarded topic, so who's biting who? How am I suppose to take this discussion seriously when you guy's are talking about nonsense like "roomates say he used facebook to stalk girls, more on self-reference", what the f*** is that? This whole discussion is getting on my nerves. Wrs888 08:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
There was an image on here yesterday that showed the shooter and another person both wearing masks. The other person appeared to be Caucasian. This image was in the article last night. Does anyone know what happened to it, Where it came from, why it was removed? Wikidudeman (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
I found this picture on the Chicago tribune site. It's actually rather interesting because until this I had figured he was actually going down the halls and entering random classes (as the news had generally phrased it) to shoot up the place. But looking at the picture it looks like all the classrooms were in one place and he didn't really walk anywhere. It's a very informative image so is there any way we could included it with out breaking copyright laws?-- Reyals 17:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Can we use it as a reference for text? The data it provides - the layout of the classrooms - is something that I haven't seen in the article or any other news outlet. Surely it's somewhere else as well, but this is the only thing we've got at the moment. -- Kizor 11:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
The second paragraph says that "[the murderer] committed suicide upon hearing the police during the second attack". Please, remove the "upon hearing the police" part, because we certainly don't know what prompted the murderer to kill himself. (Note the timelime in this article: "the shooter is dead before police arrive".) Our police "heroes" apparently had ZERO impact on the outcome of this event---so, attempting to give them half-assed credit for the shooter's suicide is certainly nothing more than apologist speculation. However, even if the police had arrived two hours earlier, we wouldn't know the killer's motivation.
This discussion is still in relative chaos. I'm combining some sections for ease of reading and clarity. If wrong, slap with fish. -- Kizor 08:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Anyone have any information on how he posted his attack on 4chan's /b/ thread? ( http://www.thestar.com/article/204030) has some information on it, but I was wondering if anyone could find other sources mentioning it and add it to the main article. -Stexe 71.225.125.176 05:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/204030
"Students at the university's online newspaper, planetblacksburg.com, today discovered a message on a website that seemed to announce the massacre.
Posted early yesterday morning on 4chan, a website that allows anonymous postings, the message warned: "hey /b/ I'm going to kill people at vtech today in the name of anonymous.""
Should this be in there somewhere? 66.169.45.213 23:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
No, the warning was actually written almost 7 hours AFTER the shooting took place. The link provided above is to a gossip newspaper.
CINEGroup
23:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok. I just found it while surfing the web. I didn't do any research. Sorry.
Straight from a strong hideout of Asian deviants I found this quote "311 Name: Anonymous : 2007-04-17 21:22 ID:VCXrJzcr
"hey /b/ I'm going to kill people at vtech today in the name of anonymous."" Is the FBI watching this??? WHY WON"T THEY DO ANYTHING!!!!
the do watch 4chan the fbi responded to a bomb treat for some football game that never would of existed and now some guy is serving a jail sentence. however with a hundred thousand or so annon posts these forums are unmanageable for the authority's 4chan is not a reliable source
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.27.18.25 ( talk) 01:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC).
Here's a reliable source : thestar.com. And la times says that he posted "im going to kill people at vtech today" on a forum.-- PseudoChron 01:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Um, thestar.com is the URL for Canada's best selling newspaper. It is not a gossip paper, it is a leading Toronto daily. 74.12.68.159 02:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)bangthedrum
Both of those articles source the student news site which found the original 4chan post, which we've already confirmed is a hoax and was posted long after the shootings. This topic should be closed from discussion. - Ennuified talk 03:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
This very post actually has been published in this swedish newspaper: http://expressen.se/nyheter/1.642133 (you can see it there), and is in the print-edition as well. pictures will be posted, if it is included in this article sometime, hopefully.
http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0030372 talks about it somewhat. Do we know which drugs the shooter was on? Could this be part of the story? 69.117.70.35 21:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
we read: "Mr. Cho awoke before 5 a.m., then sat down to work on his computer and awakened Mr. Aust in the process. Mr. Grewal, who shares a room in the same suite, saw Mr. Cho in the bathroom shortly after 5 a.m.
As usual, Mr. Cho did not say anything to Mr. Grewal. No good morning, no hello, Mr. Grewal said. Mr. Cho stood in the bathroom, brushing his teeth, wetting his contact lenses and applying a moisturizer.
He also took a prescription medicine. Neither Mr. Aust nor Mr. Grewal knew what the medicine was for, but officials said prescription medications related to the treatment of psychological problems had been found among Mr. Cho’s effects." 201.19.170.38 14:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
A 23 year old man is hardly young or a child. And without some proof, it doesn't belong in an encyclopaedia. Nja247 ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Would it be worth having a section on Jack Thompson and his response? 71.127.199.199 00:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree with Ennuified - not in this article. It may be relevant, however, in Jack Thompson (attorney). -- Chuq (talk) 01:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
There is no credible third-party evidence that the gunman played video games. There is only evidence that Jack Thompson thinks the gunman played video games. So there should be no discussion of the "video games made him do it" theory unless reliable sources show that he was involved in violent gaming. szyslak ( t, c) 03:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thompson's a vulture. Merely mentioning his name might conjure him. Honestly, the points where I agree with him make him far more unsavory than the points where I disagree - he sullies and cheapens all that he touches. Seriously, though, is it really desirable or acceptable to include his commentary, commentary which would surely remove accountability completely from Cho's shoulder's and placing on the things in this country Jack Thompson percieves as "bad influences". I'm not big on violent video games myself, and definitely feel like there are better avenues of recreation, but do we really want the friends and family members of the victims who might read this page to read excerpts of Jack Thompsons contentions that videogames, not a daranged psychopath, killed their children? Long story short - please no. Liquid entropy
the interviewer of the suite mate on msnbc mentioned counter strike several times, another instance of the media blaming video games...maybe some one wants to add this or address it in greater length
additionally if you want the Rutgers University response, I can get the email the president sent out.
Does anyone know of any significance to this name.
It is now being reported that the term was actually AX ISHMAEL. 151.213.177.128 23:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)gnoko
ISMAIL AX, obviously is an anagram for SALAMI XI (salami eleven) 207.118.168.114 03:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
According to one website, ISHMAEL means "God will hear." This appears to fit with his manifesto to NBC.
There's a typo in the article -- whatever the real spelling, "Ismale" is wrong. Mergy 11:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
My personal interpretation (for all that's worth) is that he is using Ishmael to refer to a rejected outsider who wanders the earth. This is how critics interpret the significance of the name in
Moby Dick.
Paladinwannabe2
14:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
[[:Image:Frontpage18april.jpg|thumb| The Sydney Morning Herald front page April 18, 2007.]] suggestion to remove the picture from the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald, which seems to suggest a relationship either current or prior with the first victim, Emily, which was later stated to be not true. it appeared that Cho was obsessed with the girl and that they had no prior relationship note: i deleted the picture which contains the misleading and contradictory headline YanShen 10:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Mind, it is relevant that Emily was first assumed to be a girlfriend and reported as such. This should be (and is) covered in the text, and the front page could illustrate media response. -- Kizor 11:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Is Emily's (the first victim) roomate's name relevant. Because i think i might have it. she is listed in the article as having talked to the police and having suggested the wrong person (eg: Emily's boyfriend) - Joetheguy 13:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure leaving out the qualifying peace-time in describing this as the largest mass shooting in the lead is accurate. I'm fairly sure there were larger incidents during times of insurrection, Civil War, Bleeding Kansas, Mormon wars, etc. The massacre at Ft. Pillow is one such example. Ronnotel 14:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
It really seems to be extending to a ridiculous degree. The timeline, in particular, is too spaced out, and stretches the article. The Response section also seems over-the-top - I mean, come on, Sporting Tributes? I'm not trying to be mean, but I don't think that belongs here. Snorgle 15:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
It seems appropriate that there be a comparison between this section and the separate article Cho Seung-hui. It appears that this section is much larger than normal for a teaser summary. (This section also could offer improvements for the main article.) Changes probably need to stablize first or the cross editing could be very difficult. Any thoughts? -- Lmcelhiney 17:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Is the April 2nd bomb threat relevant as part of the timeline... especially since it then says the person who called it in is unknown -- Elg26 17:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Police never reported that the motive was a domestic dispute between Cho and his ‘girlfriend’ Emily Hilscher. This seems to be a miss-reported combination of facts -- that the police initially thought Hilscher’s boyfriend was the killer, and that the killer turned out to be Cho.
I suggest changing the line in ‘Possible Motive’ to the following:
Early reports suggested that the killing was the result of a domestic dispute, but this was based on the fact that the first victim, Emily Hilscher, had spent the weekend with boyfriend, Karl Thornhill, who was known to own guns. As police located and questioned Thornhill, the second shooting began. It was at that time investigators realized their initial theory was incorrect.
At this time, Cho is not known to have a connection to Hilscher. Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3052279&page=1
I'm a new user, so I can't make this change myself.
Not a registered user, so can't make the changes myself, but at the moment, we have:
9 mm Glock 19 and a .22 caliber Walther P22 handgun.[30] Cho purchased the 9 mm Glock 19 at Roanoke Firearms[31] on March 13, 2007, and the .22-caliber handgun was purchased February 9 at a pawnshop in Blacksburg.[32]
Where the references are:
Reference 30 names the Glock, but simply says "a .22 caliber handgun" for the other; reference 31 doesn't mention the guns at all, and reference 32 gives details on both. The way the citations are used in this passage is therefore clearly wrong, since, with the exception of reference 32, they don't support the statement they're attatched to.
My suggestion would be to remove reference 31 altogether, and to quote reference 30 and 32 together at the end of the passage. With the citations done nicely, that looks like this:
Officials believe he used a 9 mm Glock 19 and a .22 caliber Walther P22 handgun. Cho purchased the 9 mm Glock 19 at Roanoke Firearms on March 13, 2007, and the .22-caliber handgun was purchased April 13, 2007 at a pawnbroker in Blacksburg [1] [2].
If anyone wants to cut and paste that, that would be helpful.
-- Tom Anderson 2007-04-18 18:55 +0100
should we put up pictures of the victims? Mercenary2k 17:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
No. They aren't notable, let alone their pictures. Titanium Dragon 18:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I vote we delete the picture of the kids hiding. Not only is it creepy beyond on reason, it also serves no real purpose.
H2P (
Yell at me for
what I've done)
04:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
There should be more about the Facebook response in this article, considering this is a college event and almost every student uses it.
There's a group: "A tribute to those who passed at the Virginia Tech Shooting [5]" which has 230,000 members. Including 1800 pictures that combine the VT black ribbon with their school logo and the words "Today, we are all Hokies"
Someone should also mention the history of this black VT ribbon because it is now being used by almost every student at VT as their facebook picture. [6] -- Bbabul01 19:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
If anyone is inclined or interested, here are some mainstream media reports about the the use of social networking and similar tools in relation to these events:
(Links shamelessly stolen from Gary Stager - but there are others out there if anyone cares to look!) -- ElKevbo 20:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please reduce the number of citations for this section. There has to be a single source by now that lists these so that the whole section can be given ONE citation. Is it really necessary for some of the victims to have 3 citations? 129.237.2.66 19:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, but that does not answer the question as to why we don't just give the whole section a citation instead of every single victim. I am saying that the section is difficult to read because of excessive, redundant, citations. 129.237.2.66 19:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Its not necessary to have a victims setion at all; Wikipedia is neither a place for lists nor for memorials, and the list of victims has no encyclopedic value. Titanium Dragon 19:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
No need to have this debate in two places; it is already under debate here.↔ NMajdan• talk 20:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't really know how to do it, but currently the first two references in the "University response" section are in a different style than the rest. I'm also not even sure if this is really important or not, but I figured I point it out. Jauerback 20:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
In Australia and the UK, the vast majority of articles reporting on the topic include condemnations of the US gun culture (including one by John Howard, so it is not only media, but also the governments). The pro-gun people here will probably not want to include it, but by and large (in Australia and the UK at least) the international response has been the revival of anti-gun discussion. Sad mouse 20:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
'On the other side of the issue, the Conservative Voice contrasted the Virginia Tech massacre with the Appalachian School of Law shooting, which occurred about 130 road miles (210 km) to the west in Grundy, Virginia in 2002, and declared, "All the school shootings that have ended abruptly in the last ten years were stopped because a law-abiding citizen—a potential victim—had a gun."'
This is a case where I feel wikipedia should be more critical. It is correct to report that the Conservative Voice did indeed make that quote. However any quick search brings up examples where school shootings have ended abruptly by police or non-violent means, so it is actually an incorrect statement. Rather than just uncritically repeating quotes, a little thought should go into them to make sure that they are not simply a vehicle for bias. Eg I would suggest '"... and (incorrectly) declared, "All the school shootings that have ended abruptly in the last ten years were stopped because a law-abiding citizen—a potential victim—had a gun."' Sad mouse 20:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd suggest leaving the media section as is. It currently presents boths sides of the issue and in a fair and NPOV way. Trying to poke holes in one side's opinions will open the door to doing the same to the other sides. For example, the section state "The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, an American gun control group, said that it was easy for an individual to get powerful weapons ..." One could easily argue that it isn't easy in this country to get powerful weapons, and provide evidence to back that up (such as by saying that people in Washington DC or NYC, where there are strict gun laws, have difficulty in obtaining powerful weapons). We should merely offer both sides' referenced opinions and let the readers draw their own conclusions. -- Alabamaboy 23:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm currently watching non-live press conference on BBC World that states that the gunman is believed to have sent material to NBC between the first and the second shootings. It's in as much detail as possible at MSNBC. Get this looked at, NOW. (Sorry for not doing this myself, but I'm on break from the article right now, doing creative writing) -- Kizor 21:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
included images, video, writings
mailed BETWEEN the two shootings to Steve Capus, head of NBC News
EDIT: I believe in the video Cho says "This didn't have to happen." speaks of hatred, rambles, lots of profanity (much like his plays). 151.213.177.128 21:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
Apparently Cho, when he went to reload and write the "disturbing note" recorded a video and prompted it be sent to NBC. It was sent to NBC, turned over to police, whom turned it over to FBI. It also came with multi-paged statements. Anyone have any more information?
link to the article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18169776/?GT1=9246 67.107.106.110 21:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
This has been inserted into the timeline at 9:01. Can we get a source for that timestamp? 66.162.41.118 21:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that the hollowed out bullets should be noted as well throughout the article, because this sounds like he used this inhumane method to ensure that people would be killed. From what I recall hollowed out bullets are likely to break on impact and cut through multiple organs, rather than only doing damage in one straight line. I first thought it was odd that he could manage to kill so many people with only 27 shots fired into the German classroom but this changes things because even when he misses, the likelyhood of damage through riccochet is vastly increaased -youngidealist 68.231.200.13 05:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Can someone make the lead bigger? And archive this talk page. 129.120.86.70 21:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Would it be worth including some of the copycat threats? Darrik2 21:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ 151.213.177.128 21:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
VT Killer ruled a mental defective. He was not legally purchasing his firearms under Federal law. This article acts as though there was no gun control present. The simple fact is, this criminal lied (shocking) and circumvented existing gun control laws.
ref: http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=3052278
The federally prohibitive criteria outlining the reasons an individual may be precluded from the transfer/possession of a firearm or firearm-related permit, pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C., §§ 922 (g) and (n), are as follows:
[...]
A person adjudicated mental defective or involuntarily committed to a mental institution or incompetent to handle own affairs, including dispositions to criminal charges pertaining to found not guilty by reason of insanity or found incompetent to stand trial.
ref: http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics.htm
Cut the bias Wikipedia, cut the freaking bias. -- Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 22:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
[8] HalfShadow 22:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
All sources say guns were purchased legally. But you may be right he could have lied and avoided those laws. Billbobjoe 22:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
BBC Radio 4 stated specifically before that since he had voluntarily admitted himself to the mental institution no gun laws had been broken. sure there'll be an online version somewhere. tomasz. 22:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Both shop owners are presumably living people. WP:BLP requires that any potentially negative information about a living person be well sourced. Saying that they illegally sold him the guns is unquestionably inflammatory and unless other media outlets are phrasing it that way, we should not and that language should be removed on sight. In the interest of accuracy, I see no problem with having no adjective at all, but we absolutely should not characterize the sales as illegal. -- BigDT ( 416) 23:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
So far there is nothing to indicate that his gun purchases were made illegally, nor that the normal Virginia gun purchasing process was violated in any way. Wahkeenah 23:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Aaargh! The point is not that he got them legally or illegally - the point was that it was so easy to get a gun! All he had to do was fill out a form (and possibly lie). Here in NZ to get a gun license you can be interviewed, have your family interviewed, have your gun cabinet inspected - it can take months to even get a license! You're saying the law did everything right to prevent this simply by asking him to be nice and tell the truth on his form? There goes than negative gun culture again (pity that this article refuses to document it). 203.97.51.149 01:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0b5_1176937612&p=1
rough transcript of Cho Seung-Hui's media manifesto, which was released by NBC Nightly news
package was sent from an "ishmael" (spelling unknown)
When the time came, I did it. I had to. You had a hundred billion chances and ways to have avoided today. But you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off. You just loved crucifying me. You loved inducing cancer in my head, terrorizing my heart and raping my soul all this time. I didnt have to do this. I could have left. I could have fled. But no. I will no longer run. If not for me, for my children. For my brothers and sisters that you fucked. I did it for them.
Cho also referenced Dylan and Eric as "martyrs" in his media, but this was not shown on TV.
EDIT: more excerpts from NBC News
You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience. You thought it was one pathetic boy’s life you were extinguishing. Thanks to you, I die like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the weak and the defenseless people.
Do you know what it feels to be spit on your face and to have trash shoved down your throat? Do you know what it feels like to dig your own grave? Do you know what it feels like to have throat slashed from ear to ear? Do you know what it feels like to be torched alive? Do you know what it feels like to be humiliated and be impaled upon on a cross? And left to bleed to death for your amusement? You have never felt a single ounce of pain your whole life. Did you want to inject as much misery in our lives as you can just because you can?
You had everything you wanted. Your Mercedes wasn’t enough, you brats. Your golden necklaces weren’t enough, you snobs. Your trust fund wasn’t enough. Your vodka and Cognac weren’t enough. All your debaucheries weren’t enough. Those weren’t enough to fulfill your hedonistic needs. You had everything.
151.213.177.128 23:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
I don't believe he is accusing NBC, in fact it has been stated that these videos do not provide us with any information as to who he is explicitly accusing. 151.213.177.128 01:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)gnoko
EDIT: more from pdf files sent to NBC
Oh the happiness I could have had mingling among you hedonists, being counted as one of you, only if you didn't (fuck) the living (shit) out of me. You could have been great. I could have been great. Ask yourself what you did to me to have made clean the slate. Are you happy now that you have destroyed my life? Now that you have stolen everything you could from me? Now that you have gone on a 9/11 on my life luke (fucking) Osama. Now that you have (fucked) your own people like (fucking) Kim Jong-Il. Now that you have gone on a hummer safari on my life like (fucking) Bush? Are you happy now? All the (shit) you've given me, right back at you with hollow points. Don't you wish you finished me off when you had the chance? Don't you just wish you killed me? Number of the Anti-Terrorist. (drawing of 2 figure-eights) You wanna rape us John Mark Karrs? You wanna rape us Debra LaFaves? (Fuck) you. Let the revolution begin!
75.89.75.106 17:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
A gunman killed 32 people[5] and injured another 29 before committing suicide, making it the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
Attacks
There were two attacks in two buildings. The first was in the West Ambler Johnston building, starting at 7:15 a.m., where two died, and the second at Norris Hall, where 31 died.
Cho is the 31st person that died in Norris Hall. The 32 number is victims only. Chunky Rice 23:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Untruthful (from Webster's):
2. Given to falsehood; mendacious.
"Untruthful Media Reports" seems to imply that the information was purposefully false. It would seem that "Inaccurate Media Reports" would be more, well, accurate - as I'm sure that the early media reports were not purposefully incorrect.
Bobcooley 00:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
24.234.97.79 00:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
This was not the deadliest non-military civilian massacre in US history. The Mountain Meadows Massacre was. Can someone change this, or at least get a source that proves the Virginia Tech shooting as the deadliest. ( KingBurgermon 00:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC))
Huh? Have you read Mountain Meadows Massacre? It was carried out by a militia, and the area was under martial law, and it was a group carrying out the massacre, not a lone gunman. Comparing the two makes no sense at all. Carcharoth 01:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
BTW - here's the earlier discussion and the consensus that was reached. Ronnotel 01:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
How are the ethnicities of the victims relevant? AFAIK no one is claiming this to be a racially motivated attack, so it seems like adding the races/ethnicities of the victims is unecessary. Natalie 00:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
And it keeps getting posted. Kudos to who ever removes it so quickly 67.99.36.75 01:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Over at FreeRepublic, etc., a major initial reaction to the shooting was the assumption that the shooter was a Muslim terrorist, and the writing or tattoo "Ismail Ax" (sic) was seen as conclusive proof of this. Should we include this? Ethan Mitchell 01:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey You all... We don't have much info on Wayne Chiang... The dude who collected weapons and was accused at first... I started a little blurb about him int he "inaccurate media reports" section, prevoisly named "untruthful media reports"... I changed the name and added that section...
I felt that it was too sloppy the parts i added, can you guys help he fix it up? This is the first major edit ive made to a significant event's article...
-- OMGWTFBBQ BLAH 01:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
you may be able to contact him through his livejournal and find more information there, www.livejournal.com/~wanusmaximus
he is a self described shooting enthusiast, a Virginia Tech grad, a former resident of the AJ dorm, and I believe he is Taiwanese. 151.213.177.128 01:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC) gnoko
-- OMGWTFBBQ BLAH 01:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I added the details about the ammunition the shooter used. When I raised it in the discussion previously some pro-gun people thought it didn't warrant mentioning that the 15-bullet magazine he used (allowing him to shoot without reloading as frequently) was illegal until 2004. I think the ammunition is as notable as the guns that he used, and it is certainly relevant to the gun control debate that he would not have had access to the fire power he used if this had occurred prior to 2004. Sad mouse 02:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070418/REPOSITORY/704180366/1013/NEWS03
On April 18, NBC News received a package from Cho timestamped between the first two murders and the rest of the massacre two hours later. It contained a 1,800-word manifesto[50], pictures, and 23 videos.[51] In the videos, sent in QuickTime format , Cho discussed his religion and his hatred of the wealthy.
Radikaos 02:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Is the Mention of Quick Time Really relevant
It is not known what, if any, previous firearm experience or training Cho had completed before the massacre. It is not known where or how Cho obtained the chain with which he locked the doors at the stairway in the engineering classroom building.
Maybe the idea of the chain should be introduced before this, would make for a better flow in the article (personal opinion)
Radikaos 02:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I think the main picture needs to change. All it shows a bunch of students standing around. The iconic picture of this massacre is 4 cops carrying a bloodied student....Thats what is needs to go in the main box Mercenary2k 03:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Go to Commons:Virginia Tech and pick the photo of your choice ... but it has to be free. There's no way that having a non-free photo in the infobox is fair use on a subject like this - because there is an obvious replacement - any free photo. -- BigDT ( 416) 03:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Topeka, KS based hate-fueled Westboro Baptist Church, led by Fred Phelps, plan to "preach" their hate filled message at the funeral's of the VA Tech Massacre victims. These pickets usually consist of signs containing defamatory slogans, such as God Hates F*gs, [subject] are in Hell! (in this case, they would claim the victims are in hell), and others I don't feel are neccessary to repeat here.
The WBC Sites: http://www.godhatesamerica.com http://www.godhatesfags.com
News sites on the picketing plans: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/18/national/main2699800.shtml http://themoderatevoice.com/religion/12273/virginia-tech-protection-needed-as-with-columbine-funerals-and-memorial-services-pastor-fred-is-coming-to-spread-his-screed-at-vt/
Forgive me if I have added this entry wrong. Kennethv 03:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
My personal preference is that I wish we as a country would give them absolutely zero press. If you ignore the school bully, eventually he will go away. At any rate, I don't know that this warrant a mention in this article until there is actually an incident. (No opinion on a mention in the WBC article.)-- BigDT ( 416) 04:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Come now, this is no place for sensationalism. The word 'incident' is more neutral and therefore more appropriate. I'd also be content with 'killing spree', 'murders', 'killings', or 'shootings'. A massacre takes place on a battlefield, not a campus. Vranak
Everyone who is claiming consensus is NOT paying attention. There was no consensus. What happened was someone moved it arbitrarily on the basis of six hours of people voting. That's not how Wikipedia works. I complained about it, and it was decided by a number of people that it will be move locked to prevent constant move wars and disrupting editing of the article. Simply put, the people who have a vested interest in sensationalism are keeping it as massacre. In a week or so, most of them will have wandered off, and we'll probably have a real discussion about the issue. Massacre is a very, VERY non-NPOV term, see Haditha killings, which was changed off of Haditha massacre for NPOV reasons. Basically, to call this a massacre would be biased. It should be named Virginia Tech shootings, with a "if you're looking for 2006 Virginia Tech shootings, blah. Wikipedia has NOT defined massacre, contrary to the claims of random people who don't know what they're talking about. This should be called Virginia Tech shootings, but as I said before, we'll deal with it in a week when the article isn't being edited every minute of every hour of every day. Titanium Dragon 05:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
It's an established name for school shootings. See, for example, Columbine High School massacre, or the whole list. Both terms, shooting and massacre are used. IMO, if you deliberately kill tens of random people after planning it, it's a massacre.-- Svetovid 11:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Titanium Dragon's account matches my recollection: there was no concensus to move it from "shootings" to "massacre," someone just arbitrarily decided to go with it a few hours into a discussion about it. Also, you can't go by Columbine High School massacre -- that article has undergone moves between "massacre" & "shootings" a couple of times over the past couple days too. -- Yksin 16:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Some people are blaming immigration and the cross cultural transition as the reason for the killings.
http://vdare.com/pb/070418_vt.htm
just wondering whether you guys want to include this in the article
Mercenary2k 05:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Here is one theory on what the tattoo means, it's the only one I have seen so far. [11] - Ravedave 05:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I removed the paragraph quoting an Australian psychologist's viewpoint -- I think this kind of distance diagnosis is inappropriate, as it is obvious the commenter never directly assessed the shooter. It has been reinstated by its original contributor. Other viewpoints? Sfmammamia 05:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I agree - its a throwaway comment for a press piece not a reliable comment that deserves to remain in an encylcopedia Phurge 09:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
This section needs to be renamed and encylopedized. Its pretty bad right now. It should probably be integrated inline into the narrative of the attack; it shouldn't be singled out and DEFINITELY shouldn't be called something as POV as "heroic", which is completely inappropriate for an encylopedia. Titanium Dragon 05:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Heroic would of been rushing the attacker to stop him. No one did that. The whole section needs to be eliminated and integrated into the rest of the narrative. Zynkin 06:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, i'm the one who created Heroic acts section. My intention is to record the so-called-heroic act done by the victims and other non-notable students during the massacre, particularly in the case of Lumbantoruan and Zach Petkewicz which is not mentioned in any dedicated article at all. Liviu Librescu and Kevin Granata's heroic acts are recorded in their respective article pages, and I felt the need to acknowledge and record the action of Lumbantoruan, Petkewicz and others, if any, for people who didn't have their own pages dedicated in wikipedia. I agree if the section Heroic act is merged under Norris Hall shootings (If based on consensus), in order to clean it from POV language, but to retain the action and chronology of the event, acknowledging the heroic acts by the non-notable victims. Chaerani 08:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
(New user here so am not sure if I am contributing in the right way/place. Do I mention things here for others to edit or put it in the article myself? For now, am leaving it to those more keen.) There is more information on the French Canadian teacher and her apparent sacrifices in her classroom, which was apparently the hardest-hit with the fewest survivors. Please see this link to The Toronto Star http://www.thestar.com/News/article/204866 . The French class is also apparently where Cho returned for the last time before taking his own life. The significance of these events suggests that they be included under the "shootings" section. (BTW, I have noticed above that someone is calling the TO Star a "gossip" paper. Although this paper seems to have erred in an early detail from 4chan, it has won many awards for investigative reporting and can generally be trusted for solid research. It is the major 7-day weekly paper for Canada's largest city, and its credentials are normally trustworthy - certainly not to be dismissed. Anyway, the story seems worth following up, especially if you're going to include the info on other professors who sacrificed their lives for their students, no matter what section it's put in.) wiki-stikler 17:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I am not too familiar with wikipedia's stance regarding these, so I'm posting them here first since they're in .pdf format:
Hope this helps. - Shirley Grace 06:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I already got enough information on the news, why is their already a wikipedia article on this s***, it makes me sick that their is one. Useless debate, and just adds meaningless talk. I do a search result on this and their is already a wikipedia page UNBELIEVABLE. Wrs888 07:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Okay maybe I understand their needs to be an article but this discussion just adds meaningless talk. This discussion is already talking about "copycats", "deadliest massacre EVAR", religion, gun control or other retarded topics such as "Wikipedia as an Events Calendar". I find that very repulsive. Topics such as that adds nothing to to the discussion other then it being offending and disrespectful, seriously doesn't that offend you? So Valley2City if you're going to call me a noob, then I might as well call you retarded for discussing in a retarded topic, so who's biting who? How am I suppose to take this discussion seriously when you guy's are talking about nonsense like "roomates say he used facebook to stalk girls, more on self-reference", what the f*** is that? This whole discussion is getting on my nerves. Wrs888 08:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
There was an image on here yesterday that showed the shooter and another person both wearing masks. The other person appeared to be Caucasian. This image was in the article last night. Does anyone know what happened to it, Where it came from, why it was removed? Wikidudeman (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)