Who 2 Blame

In a July 24, 2012 Washington Times column, Charles Hurt lashed out at Dark Knight Rises director Christopher Nolan for expressing sympathy for the victims of the Aurora tragedy, writing that the shooting was "carried out almost precisely from the scripts of your own movies." In the column, which is labeled "An open letter to Christopher Nolan, Sean Penn and Warner Brothers," Hurt pinned blame for the mass shooting on violent films made by Nolan and others in Hollywood, telling them that "[o]ne day, you will meet the original Joker, the inventor of all evil who is diabolical and depraved so far beyond your furthest, sickest imaginations": Your celebrations of diabolical mayhem and pornographic violence prey on the fantasies of sick, fragile minds. You insulated them from the painful reality of bloodshed. You have inspired mass murder. You are the Osama bin Laden of this travesty. Joy on the July 26 episode of the View said the columnist was trying to deflect from the fact that automatic weapons were used. July 27 Maryland police broke up a shooting by a 28 year old man calling himself the Joker that had a couple dozen semi-automatic rifles, pistols and thousands of rounds of ammunition; he was planning to shoot up the office that fired him; I wonder who Mr. Hurt would like to blame for this incident. (On August 6 it’s reported that the Dark Knight topped the box offices for the third week.)

On December 15, 2011 it was reported that the Geezer bandit had 11,107 fans on Facebook and Geezer merchandise (cups, shirts, etc) is being sold. On February 5, 2011, John Walsh highlighted the Geezer bandit on America's Most Wanted; the reward was upped to $20,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of him; he goes into a bank like a normal customer, approaches the teller and draws a revolver from a leather case and hands the teller a note which reads: "Give me $50,000 or I will murder you." I believe the notoriety of the Geezer and others can influence the actions of others.

Here’s the thing. If the Supreme Court decision of June 27 was based on the court finding no creditable evidence linking the playing the video games to violent behavior then the same logic should apply to watching movies, TV and reading books. This should mean that we not ban any media from our children and that the actions of criminals are not based on what they see or hear. The Supreme Court did not take into consideration the psychologists when it made its decision to allow children to purchase violent video games. If this lack of recognizing the psychologists is appropriate then our judicial system should not take a psychologist’s evaluation into consideration when it comes to those committing crimes. I guess I somewhat agree and disagree with this notion. I believe we should protect our children from as many evils as we reasonably can. I also believe that a person whether sane or insane by a psychologist’s evaluation should not determine whether or not he or she is guilty; said evaluation if used should only apply to sentencing. So, all of us so-called sane people should stop attacking one another because of some flaw with the laws. I recently heard that 1 in 6 people have a mental illness – should they get a free pass on any and all crimes they carry out. I do wonder how many of these people had legal or illegal drug induced illnesses and how many are just fooling the so-called experts (see January 12, 2012 - US Foster Program & Drugs and April 28 – Autism blogs). I do wonder how good the logic is when I believe that we are influenced by what we hear on the news and what we hear and see in campaign ads. (On a side note – if Americans couldn’t get AK 47s and more in bulk it could eliminate the sale of guns to drug cartels and other radicals in countries outside the US and perhaps a mission like Fast and Furious wouldn’t have to occur (July 31 it’s reported that the Congressional Report said 5 ATF officers shared the blame for the botched mission; August 3 it’s said the #2 official at ATF left the agency because of the fallout from the scandal).

Yes, we all know criminals don’t comply with the laws. But guns are being handed to average citizens who think it’s okay to use a gun if you have a disagreement with someone and others that see from the news and hear criminals are making more money than they do (tougher punishments – using the death penalty – might deter those looking for notoriety or a way out of working for a living). In March 2012 alone, on national news we had 3 SWAT officers and a thief injured in a bank robbery attempt; a Pennsylvania (PA) armored car employee shooting his partner in the back of the head and taking off with about $2 million; 2 dead and 7 wounded during a shooting at a Pittsburgh, PA Psychiatric Clinic; the killing of 17 year old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida and a University of Maryland student charged with threatening to go on a campus shooting rampage; more recently, on July 30, 1,000s attended a vigil for a Massachusetts boy shot by his father.

Congress and the Supreme Court need to look at their part of not only the killings that happen across America daily but of other issues that do not provide the safety, security, health and welfare of all Americans and do something to correct the problems. We need consistency in our application of the laws and we cannot get this if our politicians and judges are influenced by their personal interests, beliefs or experiences. I do believe that people of influence, including those in the news media as we depend on them to get information that we’re not privy to, should be held to higher not lesser standards as they should be setting an example for the rest of us.