Mark Steyn is correct.

Based upon the number wounded and killed, Cho fired over 100 shots. That means he had to reload several times. Just based upon the law of random numbers, it is amazing that not one student took any action.

British hostages are not comparable to Virginia Tech. The hostages gave BBC and CNN the propaganda they wanted to save their lives. The students did nothing to save their lives. Only a 76 year old man had the courage to fight for his life and others.

Has political correctness on campus with its resulting harsh penalties made our students too afraid to stand up for what's right?

As much as I hate to agree with any NRO article, I'm with Steyn on this.

You probably have to have a little violence in your life to see violence as an out though.

David, I think you're on to something. No one really knows how they'd react at a time like that until it happens, but if you haven't at least thought about the possibilities, you probably won't have many useful ideas when the time comes.

Resisting the enemy is what soldiers/sailors are supposed to do; therefore lumping them in with VTech is flawed reasoning.

I've not formed my opinion on the larger question yet.

Many of the VT students had no warning this was coming. I think the monster went into 3 different class rooms. The first classroom obviosly had no clue what was happening until he started shooting.
That is the moment the fight of flight mechanism is going to kick in and I believe the first reaction of every person making comments about the cowardice of the VT students would have chose flight and dove for cover.
Diving for cover is the normal reaction to someone unexpectedly shooting at you. When the shooter left the room the surviving students did act they got up and barricaded the door to prevent the killer from coming back in, which the killer tried to do but was prevented by brave students standing at the door holding it shut even while the killer was shooting at them through the door.

The other students in the other classrooms including the elderly teacher DID act, they barricaded the door and jumped out the window breaking bones to escape.

Jake Wrote:

Based upon the number wounded and killed, Cho fired over 100 shots. That means he had to reload several times. Just based upon the law of random numbers, it is amazing that not one student took any action.

Cho had two guns it is unlikely both guns went empty at the same time. Cho probably planned it that way to reload one while having ammo left in the other.

It only takes 2 seconds to reload a gun but it does take both hands. I would bet the reason Cho would shoot a whole bunch and then leave the room and then return was to reload in the hallway or another tactictally superior position. If he reloaded in the classroom in that 2 seconds the students may have acted in that 2 second window and attacked him.
We will never know.

Maybe I'm not man enough for Mark Steyn, but how exactly were they supposed to fight back? He had a gun in each hand and they were unarmed. If I saw some guy coming my way with even one gun, I'd get the hell out of the way into a safer position.

The examples he cites, Flight 93 and the shoebomber, are totally different. In those cases, the bad guys were armed with only knives or a book of matches. It's much easier to subdue someone in that situation. Also, in those situations there's no fight or flight option. There's no running for cover aboard an airplane which will either crash or explode.

I know how I would react. I would try to stop it and, if failing to stop it, at least give others more time to escape. I've been shot. I know how it feels and I'll be damned if I'm going to watch it happen or run away knowing I might have left somebody behind to die in my place. That's me though. I can't say they were right or wrong for what they did or didn't do. I may not understand them, but I can't fault anybody for their actions, except for the shooter, of course.

That's me though. I can't say they were right or wrong for what they did or didn't do. I may not understand them, but I can't fault anybody for their actions, except for the shooter, of course.

That's exactly it. I hope that I would be courageous and brave. I hope I wouldn't just stand there or try to run and hide. But, the reality is, until we're in that situation, it's hard to know what we'd do.

I hope that I would be courageous and brave.

It's not about being courageous and brave, it's about recognizing the threat and having more tactics available to respond to the threat with than "run away".

He had a gun in each hand and they were unarmed.

How many of those students had books in their backpacks? Laptops? Chairs?

This isn't an attempt to slander the kids, more just to point out that probably none of these kids had ever been threatened, so they never developed the fight part of the fight-or-flight instinct.

Steyn is wrong; Ace is right.

The natural, normal human instinct is self-preservation (extended to immediate family, to an extent).

That is why soldiers -- a tough lot in the first place -- need extensive training to get them to shed that tendency.

What are you gonna do? Send all citizens through boot camp?

I don't think the early reports that the students were lined up against the wall and syematically shot were true. If this happened it would be bad if nobody fought for thier lives.
But from the accounts from the surviving students, Cho walked into the room and randomly shot at people very quickly. In a matter of seconds he could shoot 30 rounds. Unless you absolutly know your going to die the first reaction during shock, confusion and fear is to hit the deck and hope you are not going to get shot. And your first thought is not to pull a laptop out of your backpack and standup to throw it at the pycho.

In a matter of seconds he could shoot 30 rounds.

In a matter of seconds he could shoot 18 rounds, then he would have to put down both weapons and reload.

And your first thought is not to pull a laptop out of your backpack and standup to throw it at the pycho.

Agreed, but it could reasonably be your second, if you were in an adrenaline-fueled, heightened state of awareness and had not immediately and completely succumbed to the fog of war.

Again, this isn't criticism of the kids, it's criticism of their parents for sterilizing and neutering their experience.

David, what makes you think he only had 8 round magazines plus one in the chamber?

I went to U Albany and we had a hostage situation where the gunman was tackled and unarmed. He had a rifle and got a couple of shots off.

2 Semi auto handguns is a TOTALLY different ball game. his 22 was absolutely the backup weapon used to fend off anyone who would come near him during re-load.

It's absolutely absurd to assume that unarmed, suprised individuals would charge at someone with a gun. Even if they did they would get shot with the secondary weapon. I'm sure some did rush him during reload and they're now part of the 30+ dead.

Absurd? No, Dan. Not everybody can be expected to do it to be sure. But, it is not absurd to hope, if not expect, at least one person will stand up to someone trying to kill them. So far, I've only seen one account of someone who stood up to Cho and it was Liviu Librescu. Yes, he paid with his life, but how many lives did he save in the process? Would you call what he did absurd? All other reports have stated that other victims were either surprised or watched others get shot. That is what I don't understand. I can't say it is wrong, but I don't understand how anybody can watch it happen in front of them and do nothing. I fear that our fight or flight instinct is being suppressed either by evolution or by socialization. Either way it scares the absolute bejeezus out of me. As I said before though, that's me.

Absurd to ASSUME that people should charge the gunman. Liviu was a brave man but you should not use him to create moral high ground for the argument that unarmed people should rush gunmen.

I know you think you're Captain America but not everybody runs around with a bullet proof star on their shield. a.k.a. stop reading so many comic books.

Joe Grossberg made an excellent point about how the armed forces spend an enourmous amount of time to shed the self-presevation instinct of soldiers. I would imagine Liviu's concentration camp experience was the reason why he stepped up so courageously on that day.

I would say Liviu's actions were heroic not oridnary as you would suggest or expect out of every person.