Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,182 posts)
Fri Oct 2, 2015, 11:12 AM Oct 2015

Much as we might like, we can't just edit away a shooter's identity and background from public view

After every mass shooting, there is always the suggestion battered around that the identity of the shooter not be released, his background not be released, his motives not be released, etc.

And I get why people say they want this. They don't want some sick, demented person out there to celebrate mass shooters as twisted celebrities and perhaps invite them to copycat their handiwork. Nor do they want discussion about the shooter and his possible motives to overshadow those of his victims.

I get what you're saying. Really. I do.

But you can't just do that.

First of all, there's what's called the First Amendment and public records laws and freedom of the press and freedom of information. So there's a huge legal obstacle right off the bat.

But beyond even that, do we really want to whitewash away key facts about these tragic events that we are so tired of having to go through? How can we learn about how to better address these situations in the future if we've hidden the facts from past incidents?

The problem is, we live in a country where the gun lobby has prevented so many sensible legal restrictions on gun purchasing and ownership that would have likely prevented at least some of the incidents we've come to know in the past few years. Because our laws and our enforcement of such laws are so lacking, it requires additional vigilance on behalf of ordinary people to recognize the signs of mental illness or anti-social behavior (anti-social as in potentially sociopathic and unusually aggressive, not as in shy) in friends and family, especially those who have expressed an interest in guns and weapons. That way, a peaceful intervention from loved ones to get needed help and shift them away from any dangerous weapons before problems arise can prevent future catastrophes.

As much as we'd like to think people like Adam Lanza, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, James Holmes and numerous other mass shooters never existed, we need to know where signs were missed and how to address future potential problems with smart proaction, especially from those who know and love the people who could end up joining those names.

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Much as we might like, we can't just edit away a shooter's identity and background from public view (Original Post) Tommy_Carcetti Oct 2015 OP
I think it's a great plan Glitterati Oct 2015 #1
But hiding his name won't hide what happened, no matter what. Tommy_Carcetti Oct 2015 #2
Agreed. We know the locations far more than the shooter riderinthestorm Oct 2015 #3
No one but an extreme fringe of psychopaths views the shooters as "icons." Tommy_Carcetti Oct 2015 #4
I want to know everything about the shooter taught_me_patience Oct 2015 #5
And you often learn they are inspired by publicity previous mass shooters have received. n/t PoliticAverse Oct 2015 #6
 

Glitterati

(3,182 posts)
1. I think it's a great plan
Fri Oct 2, 2015, 11:41 AM
Oct 2015

all day, every reporter on MSNBC today has called him "the shooter" and we can investigate what prompted his behavior without making him infamous.

Besides, what has anyone EVER learned about motives from a dead person? Nothing more than conjecture.

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,182 posts)
2. But hiding his name won't hide what happened, no matter what.
Fri Oct 2, 2015, 11:46 AM
Oct 2015

And honestly, my guess is more people will know what "Sandy Hook" is rather than "Adam Lanza". The event made the person, no matter whether one wants to specifically name names or not. And it's ultimately the event and not the person that will likely grab some people's morbid curiosity.

So hiding the name of the person just comes off as an exercise in futility. And refusing to discuss motives and warning signs in the lead up to the shooting is an exercise in stupidity.

 

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)
3. Agreed. We know the locations far more than the shooter
Fri Oct 2, 2015, 11:52 AM
Oct 2015

Sandy Hook

Columbine

Fort Hood

Colorado theater

Etc

Noone is erasing those responsible just don't embed their names as icons in the public psyche

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,182 posts)
4. No one but an extreme fringe of psychopaths views the shooters as "icons."
Fri Oct 2, 2015, 11:57 AM
Oct 2015

And because we're not as stupid as to remove all references to these events taking place, any slight amount of research will unveil the name of the perpetrator.

I just see this as a non-issue. None of these people are being celebrated in the first place, so why do people talk about it as if we are?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Much as we might like, we...