Forums > Personal > Recent US shootings...

forum rss feed
Author

magicalfreddiemercury user not visiting Queenzone.com
magicalfreddiemercury
Deity: 2693 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Dec 07, 10:06 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

After the Virginia Tech horror, there was a debate here and elsewhere about whether the shooter should be named or discussed. In that case, the shooter's videotaped rant was aired on TV and online. It seemed he was given more press and air-time than the victims. My own opinion was that we needed to know the profile on this guy so we could, hopefully, head off the next nut out there.

Clearly that wasn't the case as the shooter in the Nebraska mall specifically said in his suicide note, that "now I'll be famous".

And then there was this (one?) shooter in those two Colorado locations yesterday. They've yet to name him but I wonder if they should. There has to be a way for the media to provide insight to people who do these kinds of things without giving them the 'fame' they often seek.

What's your opinion? Should they talk about the shooters, mention them by name, tell us about their childhood and such, or maybe skip all that and simply compare the events leading up to the incident so we can perhaps be more vigilant in our own lives? Or...?



"The others don't like my interviews. And frankly, I don't care much for theirs." ~ Freddie Mercury



Micrówave user not visiting Queenzone.com
Delilah, on Medium Power
Micrówave
Deity: 7037 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Dec 07, 11:09 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I think we should publicly humiliate them even if you have to get a little creative. Show no compassion for these people whatsoever. Talk about how they used to dress up in their mother's clothing and steal from the local church. Don't tell me they were 'confused' or a little lost.

magicalfreddiemercury user not visiting Queenzone.com
magicalfreddiemercury
Deity: 2693 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 10 Dec 07, 11:28 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Micrówave wrote:

I think we should publicly humiliate them even if you have to get a little creative.


You know, one of the news channels did something like this - though not as extreme as you suggest. :)

They were calling the mall shooter a coward and some other names. I'm sure it felt good to publicly ridicule the guy, and I'm not really saying it's wrong, but it's still giving him publicity since he is being discussed. Maybe it would be better if they make more generic comments - Cowards like this usually have a background of...

I don't know. It just seems that whatever the reaction, there's still another nut out there. Reminds me of the DC snipers. The news coverage of those events must have given them one tremendous high.



"The others don't like my interviews. And frankly, I don't care much for theirs." ~ Freddie Mercury



AspiringPhilosophe user not visiting Queenzone.com
AspiringPhilosophe
Royalty: 1711 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 11 Dec 07, 08:51 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Posturing...that's all those networks that ridiculed the shooters did. And that's outside the point.
Forgive me if I seem have to missed the boat somewhere (I've got a plan B paper and medieval philosophy due Friday so I've got nothing but medieval philosophers running through my head; so I may actually have missed this) but every time there is a shooting somewhere they profile the shooter. And it's ALWAYS the same characteristics; someone who isn't mentally stable, who was bullied or felt bullied by society, who was a loner. And how has that information helped us avoid public shootings? It hasn't. If you could simply lock up any person that you perceive to be unstable, a loner or someone who you think feels bullied by society then half of the US population would be under lock and key. Truth of the matter is we cannot lock up anyone until they do something that warrants it.
And you also cannot force the people in their lives (if there are some) to force these people in mental health treatment. These people are generally not ill enough to warrant their families doing this; they could only be admitted with the permission and acquiescence of the person themselves, and you know that they never think there is anything wrong with them. And this is even assuming that someone is in their life at all. In the mall shooter case, this appears not to have been the case.
So I'm pretty sure the profile has been established for the types of people who generally do these things. Though of what value that information is I do not know, since it really can't be used to any affect to prevent the next tragedy. Not saying the media should ignore the shooter, but they don't necessarily have to embark on a psychoanalytical journey through their lives; it's just a repeat of the last shooter and a foreshadowing of the next one.



Formerly MHG
Micrówave user not visiting Queenzone.com
Delilah, on Medium Power
Micrówave
Deity: 7037 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 11 Dec 07, 11:59 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Well said, Maggie. And some kid out there sees the profile and thinks there's some kind of connection. Next thing you know, we've got round two.

I could care less about their feelings leading up to the events. There's nothing you or I as a society can do about that. It's time to hold accountable the people that led up to the psychopath's breakdown, namely the parents. Turn their lives upside-down trying to solve the problem. Leave me and my TV alone!!!