At the beginning of the narrative, the authors indicate that ‘a decade ago, the city had been designated an all American City, but more recently, its normally tranquil environment has been disturbed by an increasing number of assaults and homicides’. The authors also indicate that the violent incidents have involved students at the university. This passage gives a solid background of the gunman incident. From the passage, it can be deduced that the city in which the incident occurred was initially peaceful and that a majority of the inhabitants were Americans. The passage also highlights the fact that the current assaults and homicides are common in public universities in that particular city. This gives the reader a clear picture of the episodes that occurred.
The authors also give a detailed analysis of the gunman. In the passage, the authors highlight that the gunman, aged 43 years, was a graduate student studying actuarial science at the postgraduate level. The authors also highlight that the incident occurred on a school day, Monday, just a few minutes before the commencement of lectures on that particular day. The gunman was heavily armed. He had a vintage Korean War Military semi automatic rifle loaded with a thirty round clip of thirty caliber ammunition. On top of that, the authors highlight that the gunman had an extra thirty round clip in his pocket. At the time of the incident, according to the authors of the article, twenty students out of a total of thirty had arrived for the lecture. Their lecturer was on the way to the lecture room when the incident occurred. This passage has vital information regarding the incident. First, the reader can tell that the gunman was a postgraduate student aged 43 years. The age and level of study of the actuarial science student who had turned into a gunman are extremely essential in this context. Analysts of offenders use demographic information such as age and educational level of criminals to assess the motive behind crime. At the age of 43, the gunman is probably married. Generally, there are various reasons which force people to engage in criminal behavior. In an attempt to explain why people engage in criminal behavior, social control theorists argue that people obey the law because behavior and passions are controlled by internal and external processes. Proper socialization enables people to develop a strong moral sense, which prevents them from hurting others and violating social norms. They develop a commitment to social conformity, which requires that they observe the norms of the society. Properly socialized people are cautious not to engage in crime activity because they fear hurting their loved ones or tainting their images. In other words, according to (Siegel, 2011), people’s behavior, including criminal activity, depends on their association with conventional institutions, individuals, and processes.
On the contrary, social control theorists argue that individuals who are not properly socialized, who lack a commitment to themselves and others, are free to violate the law and engage in deviant behavior (Siegel, 2011). Such individuals hold the opinion that they have nothing to lose even if they engage in crime. Thus, to prevent delinquency, juveniles must be properly socialized; they must develop a strong moral bond to the society. The units of social control most influential in the establishment of the bond are the family, school, and the law (Brenda & Robert, 2010).
Looking at the explanations presented by social control theorists, it is evident that socialization significantly influences and individual’s behavior. In this case, socialization assists people to bond, and in the process they end up avoiding criminal behavior. However, it should be noted that individuals who engage in criminal behavior also socialize, but in this case, with the wrong people. The underlying principle with regard to this theory is that socialization influences the ability of an individual to engage or not to engage in criminal behavior. The aforementioned passage outlines several critical facts that are essential in the description of how and when the incident occurred and an explanation of the aftermath of the incident.
In addition, the authors highlight the aftermath of the incident. They report that campus police were the first to arrive at the site of crime after receiving a distress call. Campus police arrived at the scene of crime within three minutes from the time they received a distress call. Thereafter, the gunman, who had managed to escape, was captured by police in less than an hour. This passage indicates that campus police are extremely alert and swift and that they took control of the situation within the shortest time possible.
The authors also highlight that the Police Chief and the Vice Chancellor of Students Affairs described the incident at a press conference. The authors also indicate that the Students Affairs office contacted the Student Health and Employee Assistance Program counselors and instructed them to be available for any student or staff requesting assistance. According to the narration by the authors, the turn up for the counseling sessions set up by the Student Health and Employee Assistance Program was extremely low. Only one student booked an appointment with the counselors. From this passage, it can be deduced that whereas the university has a well established students and staff counseling program, students and staff are not utilizing the facility as expected. Even though a good number of students and staff were disturbed by the incident, they did not go for counseling. Furthermore, the authors highlight that some of the staff had encountered traumatic episodes owing to other traumatic events that occurred in the university in the past. This indicates that traumatic incidents are common in the university. This statement marries with the earlier statement in which the authors had indicated that incidences of homicide and assaults are on the increase in the city in which the university is located. In addition, these incidences are common in large public universities. These passages help to define the context within which the incident occurred.
Moreover, Creswell (2011) argues that qualitative data analysis consists of describing information and developing themes. According to Creswell (2011), the process of qualitative data analysis is exceptionally essential during the research process and it relies on proper data collection. During data collection, researchers are tasked with a huge responsibility of segregating useful data from irrelevant data. Creswell (2011) recommends that researchers should take decisive measures to eliminate errors associated with sampling and data collection. This can only be achieved by choosing appropriate data collection tools (Creswell, 2011). The final results of any research process rely heavily on the data collected. It is extremely important to gather all the useful information required to make generalized conclusions about the study at hand.
References
Brenda, B., and Robert, V. (2010). A Primer on Crime and Delinquency Theory. Stamford, Connecticut: Cengage Learning.
Cresewell, J. (2011). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New York: Pearson.
Siegel, L. (2011). Criminology. Stamford, Connecticut: Cengage Learning.