As I stated in the opening post, human beings don't have the capacity to deal with tragedy easily, so we default to the factory settings. I believe, in sirmethos' case, that involves creating distance by implying such tragedies are predictable, (and therefor avoidable.) Conflating past events with the current example is another way to marginalize the impact of what happened. We all have ways of "writing off" information that makes us uncomfortable. It is sometimes easy to act cynical, because it gives the illusion of control. I think methos' statements are a completely natural reaction. I also understand why that expression of cynicism upsets people, who don't want to meekly accept the nihilism of that response. There's a frustration, a feeling of impotence, to which the regular response is "there must be something we can DO!"
Well, you're partially
correct about my response.
We just have to look at how frequent attacks like that are to know that they are, to a point, predictable. But only to the point where "it's gonna happen again sooner or later". I don't think attacks like that are, in any way, avoidable. Quite the contrary, they are un
It's simply a case of "haters gonna hate." There's always gonna be another psycho with a weapon. Just like, around here, there's always gonna be another troll. it's just a matter of time.
In the case of the troll, we're all annoyed, amused, irritated,etc. that he's there, but there isn't a single one of us, that is surprised that another troll has shown up. The same goes for killings like this. It's a tragedy. It's horrible. But it sure as hell isn't a surprise.
And yet, with killings like this, every single time, people are going "we never saw it coming!" -.- If that's the case, then you're either an idiot, or in denial.
The M.O. might be a bit different than the last one, the location and timing is different. But a massacre is a massacre is a massacre. Wanna start a real discussion? Then start looking at the actual problem, whatever that is, and not the individual psycho gone berserk.
The killings are just the symptoms. Try talking about the actual disease instead.
And one of those people happened to be a six year old child. I also heard that another was a four year old.
Saying that the deaths of children isn't shocking comes off as heartless, if not being heartless.
The fact that children died, just makes it that much more horrible and tragic. It doesn't make it any more of a surprise. And again, "shock", implies a certain element of surprise.
Saying it's not a surprise, simply because children were involved, makes me heartless? From where I'm standing, saying that it is
a surprise. Children or no children, makes you, to repeat myself(again): "either an idiot, or in denial."