Does media coverage focus too much on gunmen responsible?

0
298

By Sarah Witaker, Contributing Writer

Jack the Ripper: a legend wrapped in grizzly true events, which led to the deaths of at least five women.
No guns were involved, just senseless brutality in which even the police were taunted with letters and bits of body parts.
 The papers gave him massive coverage, and any paper in England not covering him at the time would have been considered behind.
They called him The Leather Apron, the Whitechapel murderer, and gave him infamy beyond his wildest dreams before the murders had settled down.
Nobody knows if he was caught, simply skipped town, or who the person was in the first place.
He is legend, a legend born of media.
Ask an average person on the street who Jack the Ripper is and people would know he was a murderer.
Ask who his victims were, and only enthusiasts of the crime case would be able to give you names of any of the five.
I use this example to illustrate guns are not the problem of this country, the media is.
Who were the victims of Charles Manson? Ted Bundy? Seung-Hui Cho?
The Columbine shooting happened over ten years ago, carried out by Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.
People will always remember Columbine as a place of death.
I’m sad to say that I still get the chills when I walk through Von Maur at Westroads mall.
I couldn’t tell you the name of the idiot responsible for the deaths in that shooting, but the media etched it into my heart as a place where people were shot.
Why? Why, are we so in love with these shootings?
Can you tell me any of the victims of Columbine?
The memory of Rachel Scott lives on through the people who wish to keep her memory alive.
Think about this, though. She had to die to help as many people as she has helped, starting a chain of hope with her demise.
Does it have to take such as critical event such as being murdered to bring people to love themselves and act in mercy?
What can we do, though? Stop giving these murderous rampages attention? Less attention, yes, but at the same time we cannot let the past be unknown to us.
President Obama wept over the Connecticut shooting, giving power to Adam Lanza’s act.
Am I saying he should not have wept? Hardly.
That was a tragic event.
If Adam did the deed to be recognized, we gave the man everything he wanted with the tears of the leader of our country.
We saw everyone weeping to this tragedy for days on end around the world.
We do this almost every time an attention-wanting psycho uses his weapons in a public area.
Why do you think they kill themselves before the police can get them?
They go in suicidal in the first place, wanting to make their eternal mark on the world.
They succeed because we let them succeed.
 

Comments

comments