When the shooter was still unidentified, there's little question that people assumed that he fit a certain profile. We jump to conclusions , and then are left with the shock that he's not what we had expected. I guess the question to ask ourselves is why at the age of 23 would someone feel that his life is so bad that he has no other options. And then you have to question why it is that the Korean students are banning together for support.
The shooter was described as a "loner", was this a choice, or did he not have other options? Then you have to question the demographic of the student population at the university, and the respective demographic in the surrounding community. Were the victims in the shooting entirely random? Or is there a pattern, that although seemed random, fit a certain criteria?
What it boils down to is what in society has caused people at such a young age to feel the need to act so violently towards others.
Although it is good to be well informed, when does broadcasting go too far? Is it really necessary to refer back to Colombine to show the severity of the event? Part of me feels that the constant reminder causes more harm than help, because although something like Colombine is just a sign of the troubles that have befallen our teens, it is also providing an example for others to "follow". It seems like it is time to reevaluate our society for all that it thinks it is doing for the people.
No comments:
Post a Comment