"If we refuse to name the criminal, we cannot address the crime."
That statement seems vapid to me.
What are your thoughts on refusing to name the Christchurch shooter?
0
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
1 comment
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.This monster might not be for fame but a copycat might be. If we can demote the copycat's motive for little cost then I am for it.
The costs should be discussed. The move to dehumanize mass murderers allows us to ignore our own inherent evil and not engage in battle against our base selves. The article correctly notes that the Christchurch monster was not crazy or stupid.
RobBlair
Level 8
Mar 26, 2019
0
Agreed. But what does his name have to do with addressing the crime? It doesn't matter what his name is, or if the name is kept from being mentioned. That doesn't change the nature of the crime or diminish anyone's ability to address the crime.
Saying one cannot address the crime without naming the criminal is a stupid statement.
@theanimalside "...media coverage of each mass killing is partially responsible for .30 of future mass killings."
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.