How to Stop Mass Killings with One Congressional Act. (With Petition to Congress)

[Silhouette]

15-minutes of fame is getting out of hand. Time to act to put a stop to the motivation.

Given nearly every shooter's motive for doing these killings, the only law that should be passed should be that in any mass shooting or killing, the perpetrator's name cannot be mentioned....ever...period. And anyone who does so in major media does jail time mandatory, because just fining them wouldn't work. They'd gladly pay it for the PR advertising fund inflow. Anyone in minor media (social media) gets a mandatory stiff and punitive fine.

1st Amendment exception for the clear an inarguable better benefit to all US citizens and their safety. If they can make exceptions for the Patriot Act, Congress can make exceptions for the "Anonymous Murderer Act".

 

[Ravi]

Sounds stupid, IMO. It kind of gives them more power than they deserve....so evil no one can say my name!

Instead of feel good bullshit lets try something that accomplishes something.

 

[Silhouette]

Case in point:

*******
If you watched any of the coverage on television of the mass shooting at that community college in Oregon, you probably heard Sheriff John Hanlin repeatedly tell reporters that he would never publicly utter the name of the shooter.

Sheriff Hanlin isn't alone. According to the Wall Street Journal the sheriff "is one of a growing number of U.S. law-enforcement officials who are actively avoiding naming the suspects in mass shootings, noting that many cite prior killers as inspiration, and seem to be motivated by a desire for infamy."

And more than a few in the world of television news see things the same way, and also refuse to give the killers name.

For the record, his name is Christopher Harper-Mercer. As a journalist I have absolutely no qualms saying who the gunman was. But there is something to the concerns of more and more people in law-enforcement and journalism. Here's what the Oregon killer had posted about another deranged shooter, the one who not long ago killed two journalists in Virginia.

"A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight."


Read more at Bernard Goldberg - Should We Give the Oregon Mass Murderer What He Craved --- Recognition?
**********

 

[M14 Shooter]

There's only one way to prevent mass shootings:
Magically get rid of all the guns, including those owned by the state.

If you aren't willing to do that, or agree that this is impossible to do, you then have to accept the fact that there will always be mass shootings.

 

[Silhouette]

Sounds stupid, IMO. It kind of gives them more power than they deserve....so evil no one can say my name!

Instead of feel good bullshit lets try something that accomplishes something.

Nope, they WANT their name spoken. Anonymity is like kryptonite to their Super Man.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

15-minutes of fame is getting out of hand. Time to act to put a stop to the motivation.

Given nearly every shooter's motive for doing these killings, the only law that should be passed should be that in any mass shooting or killing, the perpetrator's name cannot be mentioned....ever...period. And anyone who does so in major media does jail time mandatory, because just fining them wouldn't work. They'd gladly pay it for the PR advertising fund inflow. Anyone in minor media (social media) gets a mandatory stiff and punitive fine.

1st Amendment exception for the clear an inarguable better benefit to all US citizens and their safety. If they can make exceptions for the Patriot Act, Congress can make exceptions for the "Anonymous Murderer Act".

An agreement with media would be nice, but a law would be unconstitutional.

 

[Ravi]

Case in point:

*******
If you watched any of the coverage on television of the mass shooting at that community college in Oregon, you probably heard Sheriff John Hanlin repeatedly tell reporters that he would never publicly utter the name of the shooter.

Sheriff Hanlin isn't alone. According to the Wall Street Journal the sheriff "is one of a growing number of U.S. law-enforcement officials who are actively avoiding naming the suspects in mass shootings, noting that many cite prior killers as inspiration, and seem to be motivated by a desire for infamy."

And more than a few in the world of television news see things the same way, and also refuse to give the killers name.

For the record, his name is Christopher Harper-Mercer. As a journalist I have absolutely no qualms saying who the gunman was. But there is something to the concerns of more and more people in law-enforcement and journalism. Here's what the Oregon killer had posted about another deranged shooter, the one who not long ago killed two journalists in Virginia.

"A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight."


Read more at Bernard Goldberg - Should We Give the Oregon Mass Murderer What He Craved --- Recognition?
**********

The sheriff is a big gun nut and lover of the NRA, in other words, part of the problem.

 

[Auld Phart]

Case in point:

*******
If you watched any of the coverage on television of the mass shooting at that community college in Oregon, you probably heard Sheriff John Hanlin repeatedly tell reporters that he would never publicly utter the name of the shooter.

Sheriff Hanlin isn't alone. According to the Wall Street Journal the sheriff "is one of a growing number of U.S. law-enforcement officials who are actively avoiding naming the suspects in mass shootings, noting that many cite prior killers as inspiration, and seem to be motivated by a desire for infamy."

And more than a few in the world of television news see things the same way, and also refuse to give the killers name.

For the record, his name is Christopher Harper-Mercer. As a journalist I have absolutely no qualms saying who the gunman was. But there is something to the concerns of more and more people in law-enforcement and journalism. Here's what the Oregon killer had posted about another deranged shooter, the one who not long ago killed two journalists in Virginia.

"A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight."


Read more at Bernard Goldberg - Should We Give the Oregon Mass Murderer What He Craved --- Recognition?
**********

The sheriff is a big gun nut and lover of the NRA, in other words, part of the problem.

Only to fools

 

[Timmy]

Who says that's the driving force of these guys?

And who even recalls thier name ? There's too many of them to keep track . I didn't remember the oregan guys name until I read it in your post .

 

[Silhouette]

It's always the driving force...they do mass killings because their squirming mental illness wants attention. It's like a little kid acting out when they want cookies or are troubled...only with guns, knives or some other type of "attention getting implement"..

 

[Ravi]

Oh, my! It was merely an anonymous murderer. That excuses everything. Put more guns out on the market!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Case in point:

*******
If you watched any of the coverage on television of the mass shooting at that community college in Oregon, you probably heard Sheriff John Hanlin repeatedly tell reporters that he would never publicly utter the name of the shooter.

Sheriff Hanlin isn't alone. According to the Wall Street Journal the sheriff "is one of a growing number of U.S. law-enforcement officials who are actively avoiding naming the suspects in mass shootings, noting that many cite prior killers as inspiration, and seem to be motivated by a desire for infamy."

And more than a few in the world of television news see things the same way, and also refuse to give the killers name.

For the record, his name is Christopher Harper-Mercer. As a journalist I have absolutely no qualms saying who the gunman was. But there is something to the concerns of more and more people in law-enforcement and journalism. Here's what the Oregon killer had posted about another deranged shooter, the one who not long ago killed two journalists in Virginia.

"A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight."


Read more at Bernard Goldberg - Should We Give the Oregon Mass Murderer What He Craved --- Recognition?
**********

The sheriff is a big gun nut and lover of the NRA, in other words, part of the problem.

Mindless nonsense.

 

[Silhouette]

An agreement with media would be nice, but a law would be unconstitutional.

Nope, the Patriot Act was unconstitutional and it didn't seem to bother Congress. This is much less broad and with the easiest oversight and public-access imaginable. If there's a mass murder, the perp's name doesn't get mentioned under penalty of law. This intrudes on nobody's privacy and the only ones who "lose" in this event is media who like to rake agony over the limelight in order to make a buck.

Fuck 'em.

Besides, they can still make their money by saying "the shooter" or "the bomber" or the "[insert method of mass killing here]" and sensationalizing the story that way. But no name, ever. Period.

 

[Ravi]

Case in point:

*******
If you watched any of the coverage on television of the mass shooting at that community college in Oregon, you probably heard Sheriff John Hanlin repeatedly tell reporters that he would never publicly utter the name of the shooter.

Sheriff Hanlin isn't alone. According to the Wall Street Journal the sheriff "is one of a growing number of U.S. law-enforcement officials who are actively avoiding naming the suspects in mass shootings, noting that many cite prior killers as inspiration, and seem to be motivated by a desire for infamy."

And more than a few in the world of television news see things the same way, and also refuse to give the killers name.

For the record, his name is Christopher Harper-Mercer. As a journalist I have absolutely no qualms saying who the gunman was. But there is something to the concerns of more and more people in law-enforcement and journalism. Here's what the Oregon killer had posted about another deranged shooter, the one who not long ago killed two journalists in Virginia.

"A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight."


Read more at Bernard Goldberg - Should We Give the Oregon Mass Murderer What He Craved --- Recognition?
**********

The sheriff is a big gun nut and lover of the NRA, in other words, part of the problem.

Mindless nonsense.

Yes, his idea is. It's also a deflection to take your mind off the problem. And you nits eat it up.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Case in point:

*******
If you watched any of the coverage on television of the mass shooting at that community college in Oregon, you probably heard Sheriff John Hanlin repeatedly tell reporters that he would never publicly utter the name of the shooter.

Sheriff Hanlin isn't alone. According to the Wall Street Journal the sheriff "is one of a growing number of U.S. law-enforcement officials who are actively avoiding naming the suspects in mass shootings, noting that many cite prior killers as inspiration, and seem to be motivated by a desire for infamy."

And more than a few in the world of television news see things the same way, and also refuse to give the killers name.

For the record, his name is Christopher Harper-Mercer. As a journalist I have absolutely no qualms saying who the gunman was. But there is something to the concerns of more and more people in law-enforcement and journalism. Here's what the Oregon killer had posted about another deranged shooter, the one who not long ago killed two journalists in Virginia.

"A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight."


Read more at Bernard Goldberg - Should We Give the Oregon Mass Murderer What He Craved --- Recognition?
**********

The sheriff is a big gun nut and lover of the NRA, in other words, part of the problem.

Mindless nonsense.

Yes, his idea is. It's also a deflection to take your mind off the problem. And you nits eat it up.

You have no idea what you're talking about - and proud of it.

 

[Silhouette]

Oh, my! It was merely an anonymous murderer. That excuses everything. Put more guns out on the market!

Listen carefully and embody this fact: You will NEVER succeed in banning guns, ever. And as long as they are for sale, untreated mental patients will buy them or steal them and get ammunition. Maybe this hasn't occurred to you and your ilk, but if a person is so whacked out of their mind and so aggravated and motivated by a sheer killing instinct to wipe out many innocents in a killing spree, a little technicality like stealing a weapon and getting ammo...or creating a pipe bomb or whatever, is NOT GOING TO STOP HIM.

So give it up. It ain't happening. However, a pragmatic solution that would actually work to curb these mass killings would be to NEVER allow the name of the perp to be uttered, or any organization he professed to be acting on behalf of. THAT is how you stop terrorism cold dead in its tracks.

We ranchers know that you don't feed a pony the grain it wants in front of other ponies after it has just kicked you. The other ponies looking on will figure out how to get at the grain too...

 

[Ravi]

Oh, my! It was merely an anonymous murderer. That excuses everything. Put more guns out on the market!

Listen carefully and embody this fact: You will NEVER succeed in banning guns, ever. And as long as they are for sale, mental patients will buy them or steal them and get ammunition. Maybe this hasn't occurred to you and your ilk, but if a person is so whacked out of their mind and so aggravated and motivated by a sheer killing instinct to wipe out many innocents in a killing spree, a little technicality like stealing a weapon and getting ammo...or creating a pipe bomb or whatever, is NOT GOING TO STOP HIM.

So give it up. It ain't happening. However, a pragmatic solution that would actually work to curb these mass killings would be to NEVER allow the name of the perp to be uttered, or any organization he professed to be acting on behalf of. THAT is how you stop terrorism cold dead in its tracks.

We ranchers know that you don't feed a pony the grain it wants in front of other ponies after it has just kicked you. The other ponies looking on will figure out how to get at the grain too...

I have no interest in banning guns. Is it possible for you to have an original thought?

 

[Silhouette]

Oh, my! It was merely an anonymous murderer. That excuses everything. Put more guns out on the market!

I have no interest in banning guns. Is it possible for you to have an original thought?

I put your two posts together as my way of calling out your bullshit.

 

[Ravi]

Oh, my! It was merely an anonymous murderer. That excuses everything. Put more guns out on the market!

I have no interest in banning guns. Is it possible for you to have an original thought?

I put your two posts together as my way of calling out your bullshit.

I'm perfectly okay with most people owning guns. It's the nuts that shouldn't have them. There needs to be a way to weed out the nuts. And owners need to be more responsible for their guns instead of letting them be stolen at such great rates.

Not saying someone's name does absolutely nothing.

 

[Silhouette]

I'm perfectly okay with most people owning guns. It's the nuts that shouldn't have them. There needs to be a way to weed out the nuts. And owners need to be more responsible for their guns instead of letting them be stolen at such great rates.

Not saying someone's name does absolutely nothing.

When the motivation for every mass killing is obvious (the killer wanting attention), then not mentioning their name not only is effective, it appears to be the only solution. Use logic. It's a great Rx for many ills...