Authorities have not released many of the details of the attack,
though several important points can be ascertained from the known
facts. Given the history of school and university shootings in the
United States, the certainty that others will occur and the warning
from the FBI about a possible
Beslan-style
militant attack, the lessons from the Virginia Tech attack
can be instructive -- perhaps even lifesaving.
Methodical Planning
First, the shooting was planned in advance and methodically
executed. This conclusion is supported by the fact that Cho carried
two pistols and loads of ammunition, that he went directly to
another building for the second phase of the attack and that he used
chains to secure the main doors to Norris Hall before opening fire.
The chains served to keep targets inside the building and to impede
the entry of responding law enforcement officers. Cho had studied
the building and planned accordingly.
Although criticism has begun over the level of
security at Norris Hall, and Virginia Tech in general, attacks of
this nature cannot be prevented by security devices and programs.
Educational institutions, especially sprawling universities, are
soft targets that cannot be hermetically sealed like a federal
penitentiary. As such, prison-style security measures would be not
only impractical, stifling and prohibitively expensive, but also
ultimately ineffective -- because even tight security cannot stop a
determined, suicidal attacker.
On campuses, even the best physical security measures --
closed-circuit television coverage, metal detectors, identification
badges, locks and so forth -- have finite utility. These measures
serve a valuable purpose, but they cannot stand alone. For one
thing, the technology cannot evaluate and react. Also, it can be
observed, learned and even fooled. Moreover, because some systems
frequently produce false alarms, warnings in real danger situations
can be brushed aside. Given these shortcomings, it is quite possible
for anyone planning an act of violence to map out, quantify and then
defeat or bypass physical security devices. In fact, security
devices can be relied on too much, resulting in a
false sense of security.
History shows us that even adding guards into the mix is not enough
to prevent attacks. The March 2005
shooting
in Red Lake, Minn., demonstrates that even
strict access-control measures, such as ID badges, metal detectors
and security guards, can be circumvented -- or neutralized. In Red
Lake, the security guard was the first person killed.
Indicators of Planning
In past cases, school shooters often have given prior warnings as to
their intentions. In other words, they did not just "snap" and go on
a killing spree. In most cases, their attacks were methodically
planned, often over a long period of time. Jeff Weise, the teenage
student arrested for the Minnesota shootings, allegedly spent more
than a year planning his attack, including conducting walk-through
rehearsals and noting the location of security cameras. Weise also
had help from a friend, who eventually pleaded guilty to
transmitting threatening messages via the Internet.
As in
workplace attacks, one of the
biggest contributing factors to school shootings is the failure to
identify the warning signs or to take the signs (even obvious ones)
seriously. Because of this, following the April 1999 Columbine
shooting, the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Secret
Service conducted an extensive study of school shootings and
developed educational materials that have helped raise the awareness
of such warning signs.
The warning signs include sudden changes in a person's behavior, his
or her decreased productivity, withdrawal from friends or the sudden
display of negative traits, such as irritation, poor hygiene or
snapping at or abusing fellow students. Perhaps the most indicative
signs that serious trouble is looming are talk about suicide and/or
the expression of actual or veiled threats. In most previous cases,
especially those involving detailed planning, the factors leading to
the violent outburst have built up over a long time. These factors
have included failed romantic relationships, stress from family
relationships, failing grades or perceived injustice at the hands of
peers or teachers. As was highlighted in the Columbine case, quite
often the shooter fantasizes about committing the attack for some
time and even shares those fantasies with a friend or via an online
form such as a blog or Web site.
Due to the government's educational efforts, several attacks have
been foiled by people who have recognized and reported the warning
signs to authorities. Of course in some cases, the signs have been
as blatant as students sharing their plans for an attack in advance
with their friends or warning other students not to go to school on
a certain day.
Although the details of the events leading up to the Virginia Tech
shooting are not yet clear, Cho apparently spent quite some time
planning his attack, which strongly suggests he gave some indication
of his intent that was not recognized or that he even made threats
that went unheeded. There are now unconfirmed reports that Cho set
at least one fire on campus, that he had stalked a student, that he
had been sent for counseling and that he was taking an
antidepressant. At least some of these indicators likely are true,
and we anticipate that others will surface as the investigation into
the attack progress.
Warning Systems
Some of the most critical comments about the Virginia Tech
administration have centered on the long delay in notifying the
faculty and student body that a shooter was at large, that the
eventual warning was not transmitted to all and that it was
confusing to those who did receive it.
One source at Virginia Tech said many people received no warning and
that communication of the event was "very much a case of who had
cell phone or wireless devices before the system was overloaded and
crashed." In some university buildings, such as the library, the
public address system is not used to convey emergency instructions.
The source said the result was that large clusters of students
"seemed to be caught between orders to go inside and some sort of
building evacuation instructions," and thus remained outside. This
confusion was cleared up once police began using the PA systems on
their vehicles to convey clear instructions to the students.
So perhaps one of the biggest lessons from this attack will be the
need for large institutions to have redundant and overlapping
notification systems that will convey clear and consistent
instructions. Such systems could incorporate e-mail notification,
text messages and public address systems. Of course any such system
would have to be routinely tested and refined to become more
effective.
Contingency Planning
Historically, incidents of school shootings tend to spawn similar
attacks so that three or four major incidents occur within a few
weeks of one another. Given that precedent, the FBI's current
concerns over a mass attack against a school, and the April 20
anniversary of the Columbine attack (which also is Adolf Hitler's
birthday), it would be prudent for university security directors,
local school boards, parents and students to review or establish
emergency plans.
Like 9/11, the massive 2003
U.S. power outage and
Hurricane Katrina, the confusion
evidenced in Blacksburg highlights the need for
contingency plans in the event of
an accident, natural disaster or attack by criminals or militants.
Such plans are important not only for corporations and schools, but
also for families and individuals. Furthermore, there should be a
plan for each regular location -- home, work and school -- that
outlines what each person will do and where they will go should they
be forced to evacuate. This means establishing meeting points for
family members who might be split up -- and backup points in case
the first one also is affected by the disaster.
When such incidents occur, the ensuing chaos often results in
difficulty communicating, as cell phone and regular phone circuits
become overwhelmed with traffic. The lack of ability to communicate
with loved ones can greatly enhance the panic felt during a crisis.
Perhaps the most value derived from having a personal and family
contingency plan is a reduction in the amount of stress that results
from not being able to immediately contact a loved one. Knowing that
everyone is following the plan -- and that contact eventually will
be established -- frees each person to concentrate on the more
pressing issue of evacuation.
Because of this, communication is an important part of any such
plan, and redundant forms of communication must be established in
advance. Past crises such as 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina have shown
that even if cell phone and regular phone circuits are jammed, text
messages and e-mail frequently will continue to work. This means
that every member of the family, including technophobes, must learn
to use text messaging and e-mail. While no emergency plan can
account for every eventuality, such plans do provide a framework
from which to work, even during times of panic.
The open nature of schools and universities makes preventing attacks
on campuses extremely difficult -- though a student body, faculty
and staff that know the warning signs can be a vital line of
defense. Once an attack begins, proper communications and
well-designed contingency plans can minimize the casualty count.
