Quote:
Originally Posted by HOOT
|
I think Ebert is correct on his main premise concerning the influence of movies, but I disagree with his explanation of why people (younger people specifically) commit these acts- If what he says about "becoming famous" is accurate, why doesn't the UK experience mass shootings in schools and elsewhere? The British media is as bad, possibly worse, than the US media when it comes to sensationalizing events and exploiting tragedies. Certainly they would do the same as CNN and MSNBC if an event like this happened there. The UK has some seriously nutty people across all ages, many of whom have the same profile as the nuts that commit these acts in the US.
What they don't have are guns (non hunting guns specifically) in mass numbers.
In my opinion, these events are a product of themselves. Mass shootings beget more mass shootings, and as Ebert points out, the media is a large part of this. The problem is that firearms provide a very easy and accessible way of starting this chain reaction of mass shootings. I think it would be extremely difficult to kill 27 people in a matter of minutes with something like a knife or axe.
And as far as the response of "nuts will find a way to get guns whether they are illegal or not"- well, the track record in just about every first world nation with stricter gun control laws seems to disagree