Following on this post from yesterday on the murderous rampage at Virginia Tech on Monday, Gary Lavergne, the director of admissions research at the University of Texas at Austin and one of the foremost experts on Charles Whitman’s 1966 sniper attack from the UT Tower, provides this insightful Chronicle of Higher Education op-ed on the legacy of Whitman in relation to this week’s attack:

In Sniper in the Tower I concluded, and later the FBI’s premier profiler, John Douglas, in his book Anatomy of Motive would agree, that “[Whitman’s] actions speak for themselves.” Any cause-and-effect theory, whether organic (brain tumor), chemical (amphetamine psychosis), or psychological (military training or child abuse), embracing the idea that Charles Whitman’s judgment or free will was impaired, is not consistent with what he did. He carefully planned every move and detail, and he succeeded in doing what he set out to do — murdering people and getting himself killed in spectacular fashion. The Whitman case taught me that sometimes our zeal to champion causes important to us or to explain the unexplainable and be “enlightened” blinds us to the obvious.
Charles Whitman was a murderer; he killed innocent people. We should not forget that. In Virginia we appear to have a Whitman-like character. It is vitally important for all to remember that there is only one person responsible for what happened in Blacksburg, and that is the man who pulled the trigger. But in Virginia the diversions have already begun. As I write this, less than a half-day since the senseless killing of nearly three dozen innocent people, Web headlines on CNN, Fox, and MSNBC read: “Did Virginia Tech’s Response Cost Lives?” “Parents Demand Firing of Virginia Tech President, Police Chief Over Handling,” “Students Wonder About Police Response.” Ironically, those headlines are juxtaposed with pictures of law-enforcement officers administering medical treatment and hauling wounded students to safety. Next to those pictures are videos of Virginia Tech’s president and chief of police, in pain and in the midst of a nightmare, bombarded with sensational questions from irresponsible reporters. [. . .]
Before we identify and learn the lessons of Blacksburg, we must begin with the obvious: More than four dozen innocent people were gunned down by a murderer who is completely responsible for what happened. No one died for lack of text messages or an alarm system. They died of gunshot wounds. While we painfully learn our lessons, we must not treat each other as if we are responsible for the deaths that occurred. We must come together and be respectful and kind. This is not a time for us to torture ourselves or to seek comfort by finding someone to blame. Maybe as a result of the tragedy we will figure out how to more effectively use e-mail and text messages as emergency tools for warning large populations. We may come up with a plan that successfully clears a large area, with a population density of a midsize city, in less than two hours. Maybe universities will find a way to install surveillance cameras and convince students and faculty members that they are being monitored for their own safety and not for gathering domestic intelligence. All of those steps might be helpful in avoiding and reducing the carnage of any future incidents. But as long as we value living in a free society, we will be vulnerable to those who do harm — because they want to and know how to do it.

Read the entire piece. Plus, check out Larry Ribstein’s observations on the effect that over-regulation may had on the tragedy.