AZ sheriff blames political rhetoric

[LuciferSam]

Video games, violent films, violent books, the internet, dieting commercials, super model shows, political speech, ...

Which should we ban first in order to protect ourselves from what might happen due to the influence some of these mediums might have on someone emotionally challanged??

I don't see any suggestion from Mango on banning anything. I see her establishing a possible cause-effect relationship beween ideas promoted by the media and some of the more negative aspects of society. The AZ sheriff made this simple observation and he's getting blasted by some, mostly on the right. Me thinks they doth protest too much. Certainly we can call out The former Alaska governor or anyone else in a position of power and influence for their thoughtless and dangerous words and actions. As far as banning media, that's a red herring on your part.

 

[scooterbug44]

What "regulatory manner"?

I just want people to be aware that all the dumb sheet and hatred coming out of their mouths has consequences - and tone it down.

If such statements are NOT socially unacceptable, and are roundly condemned by leaders, people will stop making them.

If such statements are socially acceptable, we will see more shootings, bombings, and beatings.

And quit acting like a call for civility and some common sense is a Bill of Rights issue. Being an arsehole is not specifically listed as a right.

As always, just because you have the right to say something doesn't mean you should say something or that there are no consequences for what you say.

 

[futurebeachbum]

That's what I've been trying to say, and things don't happen in a vacuum. Palin's (and other's) rhetoric fuels other's violent impulses and they in turn make threatening remarks which others overhear, and on and on... This helps create a climate, in which as you said, violent behavior becomes acceptable. I believe that's what the AZ sheriff was getting at. He's in the midst of it. As far as I know, he didn't point fingers at either the left or the right.

Oddly enough, his off-the-cuff analysis definitively linking the crime and its cause to political rhetoric turned out to be...wrong.

The nut (I refuse to give him more name recognition) has hated Gifford since a community meeting in 2007. I don't recall Palin even existing (as a national political figure) in 2007 or the first half of 2008.

Take someone with obvious mental problems, give them a grudge to fixate on for several years as their mental state declines and bad stuff happens.

As far as I can tell from the reporting no one other than media pundits and this learned Sheriff have tied this crime to rhetoric. None of the reporting on what was found in his home, web postings, etc.... points to rhetoric.

Jumping to conclusions is not something I would put on my list of desirable attributes for a law enforcement official. If this position reflects the Sheriff's ability to conduct reasoned and impartial investigation and analysis of a crime I guess its a good thing that the Feds have taken over the case.

 

[Mango]

Video games, violent films, violent books, the internet, dieting commercials, super model shows, political speech, ...

Which should we ban first in order to protect ourselves from what might happen due to the influence some of these mediums might have on someone emotionally challanged??

I don't recall Snake, a fictional character from Metal Gear-- kind of like Jack Bauer, running for an executive office working for the People of the US or have his own media talk show yet.

Real people, who are in the forefront of the media, have a responsibility to be more careful about using violent language and imagery as the basis of maintaining their status quo or furthering their cause, IMHO.

As far as the other imagery, like dieting, there has been a trend towards changing those highly unattainable ideals of what is socially acceptable.

Exercise your first amendment rights all you want, but take some responsibility when the bullet comes back to bite you in the a$$. What not use sports and teammanship type of language or imagery? why violence against an other? are cross hairs in the sights of a gun normal images people see everyday? Not in my world.

 

[Douglas the Intrepid]

I am amazed that some strive to distance any causality between hate mongering and violent actions, regardless of partisanship. Just because this event appears to be unrelated, it is still a valid topic that should be taken seriously by those in positions of power.

 

[30ashopper]

I don't see any suggestion from Mango on banning anything. I see her establishing a possible cause-effect relationship beween ideas promoted by the media and some of the more negative aspects of society. The AZ sheriff made this simple observation and he's getting blasted by some, mostly on the right. Me thinks they doth protest too much. Certainly we can call out The former Alaska governor or anyone else in a position of power and influence for their thoughtless and dangerous words and actions. As far as banning media, that's a red herring on your part.

There is currently no connection between any colorful map on a web site, or the media, or any talk show hosts, or any political party, and this event. You're both simply jumping to convenient conclusions.

 

[futurebeachbum]

I am amazed that some strive to distance any causality between hate mongering and violent actions, regardless of partisanship. Just because this event appears to be unrelated, it is still a valid topic that should be taken seriously by those in positions of power.

So, you are implying that people making unsupported and ultimately false claims of causality adds positively to the discourse? An interesting position to take.

It would seem more appropriate (to me at least) to discuss this topic on its own merit, not as the result of a politician's invalid pronouncements.

It would a lot more interesting to me if those in positions of power could use actual facts in addressing the topic.

 

[LuciferSam]

I am amazed that some strive to distance any causality between hate mongering and violent actions, regardless of partisanship. Just because this event appears to be unrelated, it is still a valid topic that should be taken seriously by those in positions of power.

Bear in mind you're dealing with a lot of all or nothing black and white thinkers. To them it's either 100% due to hate-mongering or it's not at all due to hate-mongering. There's no possibility of multiple factors. Nope, it's either one thing or the other. Once they find out the shooter is deeply disturbed, then they immediately jump to the conclusion that hate-mongering had nothing to do with it. Of course this invalidates everything the Sheriff had to say. Unfortunately, there are too many all-or-nothing thinkers in positions of power and influence. We don't need any more.

 

[AndrewG]

The media was chomping at the bit to blame the right way before all the facts were known. We so desperately need to come together as a Country. What will it take?

 

[LuciferSam]

The media was chomping at the bit to blame the right way before all the facts were known. We so desperately need to come together as a Country. What will it take?

Fewer martyrs on the right.