The role of violent media in mass homicides., page 1


Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times


reply posted on 16-4-2007 @ 09:28 PM by Harassment101
We have to look at access. We also have to look at the external factors such as family, social structures, and why this happens so much in America vs other countries.

Eg. Japan from my understanding has way more violence on tv, however I don't hear about, oh yet another violent school shooting. To be sure it probably happens, but not like in the States.

It also might happen in other countries, but not like in the States. So another factor might be, what is it about American culture or lack of social culture that causes these turns?

Then there is the obvious factor, access. Really if guns were not so readily accessable, would this be as big a problem?

I am not saying more gun laws, I am simply saying, guns don't kill people, people kill people, and more specifically, people with access to guns kill people.

Lot's of people get bullied, lot's watch violence on tv, how many get their hands on guns?

Means, oppertunity motive.

With the shootings the motive is pretty much revenge, I was bullied, I was angry etc. Hardly anyone walks up and just goes on a shooting spree, I am sure there is the exception.

Oppertunity, any place with a crowd of people, could be an oppertunity, more importantly since much of the bullying and mobbing happens on a repeated and daily bases at school or work, those are prime places of oppertunities for these situations.

Means, how many people in these situations go out of their ways to get their hands on guns? How many times are the guns readily or too easily accessable? That is when we run into problems. Many people probably have their moments, where they could go over the edge, but how many of them have the means to go through with it?


reply posted on 17-4-2007 @ 10:25 AM by ka47
Originally posted by orionthehunter
While I think it may be a bit early to link what recently happened to the media, I do have an opinion. I think more gun control is not necessarily the answer. I've read about cases where people were required or allowed to carry guns and the crime rate went down. If the criminals didn't know a number of people carried guns, they would have simply been shot in self defense instead of being allowed to go on a long killing spree.

However I am a bit mixed in my opinion since I don't want every Joe on the street to be carrying a gun. Especially if someone appears to be more hot headed than normal. If someone really wants a gun though, I believe they will get their hands on one whether it is legal or not. More gun control will only guarantee that only the criminals carry guns. Drugs are illegal in this country but there seems to be no shortage of drug related crimes.

While I believe the media tends to reflect the values and condition of society in general, I don't believe the media influences adults as much as it does children in their early years. I've watched many violent films and yet I've never gone on a killing spree. However I was told by my parents after watching the 3 Stooges as a kid that it is not ok to go hit your brother with a hammer. Some common sense needs to be applied.


agreed. disarming the law abiding citizens of this country will only ensure that they are defenseless against future criminal attacks. the trick,i think, is to keep potentially violent people from getting guns. criminal background checks,and,i think,perhaps, psychological evaluations are in order. just remember,though, ANYONE can get their hands on a knife and kill people just as dead as if they used a gun. so disarming the citizens doesn't work.

Pages:     ^^TOP^^