Virginia Tech

This is a response I sent to the Washington Post regarding this opinion piece:

It is a tragedy what happened at VT and so as I opened the WP website and saw the title of this opinion piece, I knew that what I was about to read was horrible.

Little did I know it was not gory, but pure discrimination.

Preventable??? In what way exactly? Gun laws? Metal detectors? Giant magnets?? Anyone who had that sort of premeditation and intent would have found a way to get it done unless there was martial law.

But the truly despicable opinion of Mr. Chartrand's is the insinuation that the mentally ill need to be removed from society. A Brave New World eh, Mr. Chartrand?

First, you mention a screening program. Fine, now that they are screened and identified what do you propose? A scarlet letter so everyone knows to watch them for "warning signs?" Medical records are confidential and mental status is part of that record. Screening gives every opportunity to discriminate in enrollment practices as well as encouraging social discrimination. If anyone could exactly identify the VERY SMALL percentage of people who would be murderous, they'd be omniscient. This is NOT a realistic solution.

Second, it is not that schools have no liability in protecting their students, but they can only do so within the bounds of the law. Again, your screening idea runs into a legal roadblock. Making schools legally responsible just shifts the risk of a random attack from one individual to an institution which as we all know is a perfect straw man logical fallacy.

Third, it is much lass likely that an "alienated student reached for help" and was denied rather than that student never asked for help at all. I agree that people need to talk about it and if someone does ask for help, a good support mechanism is in place. But, the people doing crimes like at VT are not the ones asking for help generally. It is BECAUSE they cannot, that they turn to violence.

Finally, your closing sentence is outrageous. This is typical over-reactive backlash to a situation. Are you a sensationalist, Mr. Chartrand? A tabloid writer? If your intention was to spark fear and increase the probability of discrimination against those with mental illness, congratulations, mission accomplished. It is irresponsible of you to write such things. The sentiment you leave the reader with is exactly the kind of statement that will lead to discrimination, close the doors to discussion, and ultimately destroy the environment of support you claim to want to achieve. What your closing statement does, fans the flames of fear and can only leave the reader with the conclusion that you believe that anyone with a mental illness is capable of killing and that something should be done about this through screening and removal from society.