In one of Robert Heinlein's later novels (The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, I believe), he posits a suggestion as to how to deal with the violently anti-social… the mass murderers and spree killers amongst us, for instance. His conceit is that these creatures are driven by a need for recognition and feel that any notoriety is better than going through life unnoticed. They are acting out in order to get the attention of the world. And they are inspired by the fame and notoriety that those that have preceded them have achieved. (The Virginia Tech shooter's reference to the Columbine shooters as "martyrs" would seem to support this notion.)
His solution to the problem is the you "erase" these individuals from the collective consciousness. Instead of 24-hour coverage of the event, debating the nature of the killer, his background, what could have driven him to this extreme, etc., you focus on the victims and their families. You put a human face on the tragedy that does not glorify (even in a negative way) the heinous act that has taken place. No reference, by name or other identifying characteristic, is made to the perpetrator aside from the generic (i.e. "a lone gunman opened fire today…"). He is excised from the public record, as if he no longer exists. He is denied his moment in the spotlight and reduced to the status of a non-entity that caused enormous harm to others.
I know that this is an impossible idea, especially in our ostensibly free society. But as I listened to the debate on the radio this morning as to whether anyone should have shown the video that the Virgina Tech shooter sent to NBC (a debate that probably raged for a matter of milliseconds within the NBC studios themselves), I have to acknowledge that, for today at least, it sounds like a good idea.
His solution to the problem is the you "erase" these individuals from the collective consciousness. Instead of 24-hour coverage of the event, debating the nature of the killer, his background, what could have driven him to this extreme, etc., you focus on the victims and their families. You put a human face on the tragedy that does not glorify (even in a negative way) the heinous act that has taken place. No reference, by name or other identifying characteristic, is made to the perpetrator aside from the generic (i.e. "a lone gunman opened fire today…"). He is excised from the public record, as if he no longer exists. He is denied his moment in the spotlight and reduced to the status of a non-entity that caused enormous harm to others.
I know that this is an impossible idea, especially in our ostensibly free society. But as I listened to the debate on the radio this morning as to whether anyone should have shown the video that the Virgina Tech shooter sent to NBC (a debate that probably raged for a matter of milliseconds within the NBC studios themselves), I have to acknowledge that, for today at least, it sounds like a good idea.
Comments
But, the sad fact is that radical Islam is right about some of our shortcomings - we are too soft to EVER deal with crime and the like in any harsh manner. Our 'compassionate' society thinks it can soothe all the bad in the world. Heck, I sometimes think it doesn't believe in EVIL at all...just 'misguidance'.
And, we are media whores. As I speak, that fucker's name, picture, video, 'manifesto', psych profile and more are all over the airwaves. I have turned it off.
And, I just bought Dead Rising for the 360 (along with Guitar Hero), so I guess i'll soon be killing by electric axe!
Fuck it - we're doomed to these kinds of tragedies because of what/who we are. I just hope that in the end, the good outweighs the bad.
Q
I haven't watched the video and haven't decided that I will. I don't believe there's anything to be gained or learned by it, so I'd just be satisfying my own morbid curiousity, sadly.
As for our shortcomings, we're too stuck treading the middle ground. We lock people away to punish them, but don't do anything to rehabilitate them. Then we're shocked when they come out worse criminals than when they went in. This kid raised all kinds of warnings, but because we're an enlightened society, we can't act til he actually threatens someone or commits a crime. And we all see where that got us. But what's the answer? I sure as hell don't want to become the society that locks people away for being different.
I haven't jumped on the 360 bandwagon yet, so I'll have to see about the PC version of Dead Rising. I hear it rocks. I've been blasting through Painkiller recently, so we're both doomed. (The stakegun definitely kicks ass!)
As for tragedies, past and future? Hope is all we've got.