It occurred to me that there is a rather unsettling similarity between the rationalizations of Virginian Tech. killer Cho Seung Hui, the American legal system, and modern morality in America in general. All three operate (or operated) under the principle of the new justice: the justice of pointing the finger. The principle of "it's his fault". Of passing the moral buck.
Everyone seems to agree that someone should have done something to prevent the Virginia Tech. Massacre. And everyone agrees that the someone to do it was someone else.
Think about these widely reported, but nevertheless amazing, facts:
"...authorities disclosed that in November and December 2005, two women complained to campus police that they had received calls and computer messages from Cho. But the women considered the messages 'annoying,' not threatening, and neither pressed charges, Virginia Tech Police Chief Wendell Flinchum said."
Got that? Cho was "annoying" enough to get reported to the cops.
Here's how CBS News puts the same thing in an article title:
Police: Cho Stalked 2 Women In 2005
Two Women Complained, But Failed To Press Charges; He Then Went To Mental Health Agency
Someone call the Gestapo and torture these bitches. They behaved like college students instead of professional detectives.
Here's a question. Since when is it the job of college students to determine whether someone should be criminally investigated? Did the 32 dead really depend on two women who had the gonads to report this cocksucker to the police, but didn't have the requisite ESP, weapons, or sufficient police training to determine that people who had police training ought to be using their own fucking brains?
Essentially, here's the response these two chicks got from the system for doing the right thing:
"Hey, kid. Would you like to press charges against this future killer of 32? If not, we have parking tickets to write up."
- US Legal System
