Random Thoughts: On Reaction
Posted 08-02-2012 at 08:26 AM by iknowftbll
"The pen is mightier than the sword." - Edward Bulwer Lytton c1839
I've long debated using the blog feature here and after some encouragement from a few other posters, have finally decided to give it a go. The next question became that of what I should give the honor of being my first blog post. After a lot of mental deliberation, I've decided that this topic is the most appropriate given recent turn of events that shocked and horrified all of us, but really struck close to home for some of us.
You see, I am from Denver, Colorado. My sister and her husband live in Aurora not far from the Century 16 Theater that was the scene of the "Dark Knight" shooting. I've watched movies in that theater. It is the theater that my sister and her husband would have gone to had they chosen to go see the premier. I live on the East Coast now, and as I heard the news, I left my sister a voicemail asking her to call me back. I sort of guessed it would be another hour or two before the Mountain Time Zone reached her normal commuting window. It was a very nervous and anxious two hour wait before she returned my call. She confessed that she and her husband had debated seeing the movie, but chose to go another night. For that I am grateful.
In the aftermath of that tragedy, we have the usual flurry of rhetoric from politicians and activists alike. What is sad is that the event was politicized before the smoke had even cleared. I am very pro-gun, but I have tried to steer myself clear of the "one gun in the crowd..." argument because you simply do not know how you will react in that situation. Also, I can't help but feel that it reeks of "I told you so" mentality. This tragedy is a time of keeping the victims and their families in our thoughts and prayers rather than throwing our pro-gun values in their faces. Likewise the anti-gun lobbies need to recognize that this is the action of one individual who made a choice to do evil. His actions are not an indictment of firearms, and it is a foolish waste of time to blame an inanimate object on the actions of an individual.
But in our “blame-happy” culture, someone (or something) must be held accountable. So who is to blame? Well for me, the short answer is to hold accountable the individual who enacted this violent crime. But society seems to demand more. So instead of analyzing the symptom (Holmes’ use of guns) let’s analyze the disease (Holmes’ inspiration for the crime). Upon his arrest, Holmes identified himself as the Joker, the infamous villain of the Batman series. The Batman franchise has become increasingly violent and ghastly in its interpretations of good vs. evil. In fact, it is hard to even call it a matter of good vs. evil considering the dark and shadowy nature of the modern Batman. Indeed the modern day iteration of Batman is a far cry from the inherently good Batman played by Adam West in the 1960s version of the show.
And “Batman” is just one small part of the larger problem at hand, that being chronic inciting of violence through movies, music, and video games. In most states, inciting a violent crime is a felony. Yet we let Hollywood get away with it day in and day out. Why? Because the products they produce are protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
I quoted Lytton’s famous line from the play Richelieu. It is as true and relevant today as it was in 1839. Think about the power of “the pen.” Before the weak had weapons, they had writing. Martin Luther’s 95 Theses? Power. Thomas Paine’s Common Sense? A rally cry for revolution. Hamilton, Madison, and Jay in The Federalist Papers? Powerful enough to bring together at one table people with stark differences in order to create and eventually ratify the U.S. Constitution. The Pen has now evolved and includes such venues of speech as movies, video games and lyrics to music. These often glorify and uplift violence, even allowing users to play as the “bad guys” in some video games.
The truth is that media and literature is more so an enabler to violence as is a firearm. I say this because literature is where our inspirations lie. A firearm is merely a tool that may be employed to bring such inspirations to reality. Both firearms and literature are enablers. Both may be used to accomplish good or evil. Unfortunately, people often choose to do evil, and when this happens, literature is often given a pass.
I am not suggesting that we impose restrictions on the violent content of these forms of speech. Instead I am asking that people consider this question: When someone uses a firearm to commit a violent crime, why is it that only 2nd Amendment rights come under assault? Why does nobody consider problematic the violent speech that is considered protected under the 1st Amendment when it is often this “protected” speech often serves as the inspiration for a violent act?
Once again I am not suggesting a clamping down on 1st Amendment rights. But if our society is going to hold guns accountable for the actions of individuals, why then do we issue a pass to the movie, music and video game industries and fail to hold them accountable for their contributions to violent crimes?
Of course, the solution is to hold the individual accountable, but I fear that we’ve lost our way on that front. In our criminal courts we no longer try to prove innocence or guilt, rather we simply try to justify or mitigate guilt. Already the “not right in the head” arguments are creeping up in the Holmes case.
Yet that will not stop many from using this tragic incident as a rally cry to enact draconian gun laws. Just as they did following the shooting of Congress woman Gabby Giffords in Tucson, or the Virginia Tech shooting, or the Columbine High School shooting (another incident that literally hit close to home). The reaction is almost always directed at a symptom and not the problem.
And while we busy ourselves attempting to treat the symptoms, the disease slowly kills us.
I've long debated using the blog feature here and after some encouragement from a few other posters, have finally decided to give it a go. The next question became that of what I should give the honor of being my first blog post. After a lot of mental deliberation, I've decided that this topic is the most appropriate given recent turn of events that shocked and horrified all of us, but really struck close to home for some of us.
You see, I am from Denver, Colorado. My sister and her husband live in Aurora not far from the Century 16 Theater that was the scene of the "Dark Knight" shooting. I've watched movies in that theater. It is the theater that my sister and her husband would have gone to had they chosen to go see the premier. I live on the East Coast now, and as I heard the news, I left my sister a voicemail asking her to call me back. I sort of guessed it would be another hour or two before the Mountain Time Zone reached her normal commuting window. It was a very nervous and anxious two hour wait before she returned my call. She confessed that she and her husband had debated seeing the movie, but chose to go another night. For that I am grateful.
In the aftermath of that tragedy, we have the usual flurry of rhetoric from politicians and activists alike. What is sad is that the event was politicized before the smoke had even cleared. I am very pro-gun, but I have tried to steer myself clear of the "one gun in the crowd..." argument because you simply do not know how you will react in that situation. Also, I can't help but feel that it reeks of "I told you so" mentality. This tragedy is a time of keeping the victims and their families in our thoughts and prayers rather than throwing our pro-gun values in their faces. Likewise the anti-gun lobbies need to recognize that this is the action of one individual who made a choice to do evil. His actions are not an indictment of firearms, and it is a foolish waste of time to blame an inanimate object on the actions of an individual.
But in our “blame-happy” culture, someone (or something) must be held accountable. So who is to blame? Well for me, the short answer is to hold accountable the individual who enacted this violent crime. But society seems to demand more. So instead of analyzing the symptom (Holmes’ use of guns) let’s analyze the disease (Holmes’ inspiration for the crime). Upon his arrest, Holmes identified himself as the Joker, the infamous villain of the Batman series. The Batman franchise has become increasingly violent and ghastly in its interpretations of good vs. evil. In fact, it is hard to even call it a matter of good vs. evil considering the dark and shadowy nature of the modern Batman. Indeed the modern day iteration of Batman is a far cry from the inherently good Batman played by Adam West in the 1960s version of the show.
And “Batman” is just one small part of the larger problem at hand, that being chronic inciting of violence through movies, music, and video games. In most states, inciting a violent crime is a felony. Yet we let Hollywood get away with it day in and day out. Why? Because the products they produce are protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
I quoted Lytton’s famous line from the play Richelieu. It is as true and relevant today as it was in 1839. Think about the power of “the pen.” Before the weak had weapons, they had writing. Martin Luther’s 95 Theses? Power. Thomas Paine’s Common Sense? A rally cry for revolution. Hamilton, Madison, and Jay in The Federalist Papers? Powerful enough to bring together at one table people with stark differences in order to create and eventually ratify the U.S. Constitution. The Pen has now evolved and includes such venues of speech as movies, video games and lyrics to music. These often glorify and uplift violence, even allowing users to play as the “bad guys” in some video games.
The truth is that media and literature is more so an enabler to violence as is a firearm. I say this because literature is where our inspirations lie. A firearm is merely a tool that may be employed to bring such inspirations to reality. Both firearms and literature are enablers. Both may be used to accomplish good or evil. Unfortunately, people often choose to do evil, and when this happens, literature is often given a pass.
I am not suggesting that we impose restrictions on the violent content of these forms of speech. Instead I am asking that people consider this question: When someone uses a firearm to commit a violent crime, why is it that only 2nd Amendment rights come under assault? Why does nobody consider problematic the violent speech that is considered protected under the 1st Amendment when it is often this “protected” speech often serves as the inspiration for a violent act?
Once again I am not suggesting a clamping down on 1st Amendment rights. But if our society is going to hold guns accountable for the actions of individuals, why then do we issue a pass to the movie, music and video game industries and fail to hold them accountable for their contributions to violent crimes?
Of course, the solution is to hold the individual accountable, but I fear that we’ve lost our way on that front. In our criminal courts we no longer try to prove innocence or guilt, rather we simply try to justify or mitigate guilt. Already the “not right in the head” arguments are creeping up in the Holmes case.
Yet that will not stop many from using this tragic incident as a rally cry to enact draconian gun laws. Just as they did following the shooting of Congress woman Gabby Giffords in Tucson, or the Virginia Tech shooting, or the Columbine High School shooting (another incident that literally hit close to home). The reaction is almost always directed at a symptom and not the problem.
And while we busy ourselves attempting to treat the symptoms, the disease slowly kills us.
Total Comments 3
Comments
-
Bravo!
Very well written and thoughtful commentary!Posted 08-17-2013 at 04:40 PM by DOUBLE H
-
The federalist papers did not bring together people to write the constitution. It was already written, the Federalist Papers were in response to earlier Anti-Federalist papers.
Violent videos games and movies and tv shows are available in every developed nation in the world. And yet it is the U.S. that has by far the highest gun mortality rate. If you can't figure out the reason for that is because Americans own guns at a much higher rate than any other developed country then you shouldn't write about anything.Posted 09-11-2014 at 09:34 AM by phillies2011
-
I thought he made some well cited points. No need to be a jerk about it.Quote:Originally Posted by phillies2011
The federalist papers did not bring together people to write the constitution. It was already written, the Federalist Papers were in response to earlier Anti-Federalist papers.
Violent videos games and movies and tv shows are available in every developed nation in the world. And yet it is the U.S. that has by far the highest gun mortality rate. If you can't figure out the reason for that is because Americans own guns at a much higher rate than any other developed country then you shouldn't write about anything.Posted 09-12-2015 at 01:30 PM by April R
