- Recon Number 54
- |
- Master Forum Ninja
- gamertag: [none]
- user homepage:
Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.
Posted by: Modern Designer
Posted by: Recon Number 54
With no live suspect (compare and contrast to Oslo) there is "no one around" to hold responsible and blame. No one to put on trial, no one to look at and try to satisfy that deep emotional need for "equality and parity of pain" (sometimes referred to as either revenge or justice).
And with no live person to point at and say "you shall pay for these acts", people will (understandably) start looking for someone/something else to hold accountable and responsible for the event and make sure that there is some sort of "we hold ____ to blame and have made sure that ______ pays".
Well almost every shooter kills themselves after the act, so it's pretty routine.
Agreed. And that almost routine outcome results in an "imbalance between the cost to the victims and the price paid by the perpetrator" which causes nearly anyone who has an emotional response to want to find someone/something else to bear the responsibility for the actions of the dead perpetrator.
Think about it, OK City bombing. We got suspects, arrests, trial and sentence. The perps were alive, caught and the system determined "justice", all is well. Oslo, same story. DC shooter(s), and so on. A live perpetrator doesn't leave the "vacuum of accountability" that a dead one does. The public still wants "someone to pay" and if the suspect is dead? Someone else still is going to pay.