Thinking, civilized people should seek the truth. But the recent circumstances involving the three teenagers who shot the Australian boy might make all of us reconsider this.
One kid named Jones who was among the guys who shot the Australian kid in Oklahoma told the arresting officers they were bored and killed him for "the fun of it."
The shooting has stimulated a lot of criticism that centers on American gun laws, even from the Australian Prime Minister. (The murderers are minors and can not buy guns legally but that seems to be unimportant to the debate.) Another thesis has been floated that the killers were under some gang initiation requirement.
So there seem to be extenuating circumstances. A motiveless murder can somehow be qualified. There can be angles to mindless savagery. This revolting episode might have a context! While this argument makes no sense, I'm for it. I can barely imagine the alternative: Three young men hunt and kill another young man, a total stranger, for sport.
So I'm just fine with the argument that, like a Borges novel, the gun did it. Or they were ordered to do it by a gang leader. The vision of armed pitiless monsters roaming the plains is worse than any apocalyptic dystopia from any zombie-loving director. And the idea that a subculture might exist that easily yawns, stretches and moves into hunt-and-murder mode is too much for any thinking, civilized people to consider.
One kid named Jones who was among the guys who shot the Australian kid in Oklahoma told the arresting officers they were bored and killed him for "the fun of it."
The shooting has stimulated a lot of criticism that centers on American gun laws, even from the Australian Prime Minister. (The murderers are minors and can not buy guns legally but that seems to be unimportant to the debate.) Another thesis has been floated that the killers were under some gang initiation requirement.
So there seem to be extenuating circumstances. A motiveless murder can somehow be qualified. There can be angles to mindless savagery. This revolting episode might have a context! While this argument makes no sense, I'm for it. I can barely imagine the alternative: Three young men hunt and kill another young man, a total stranger, for sport.
So I'm just fine with the argument that, like a Borges novel, the gun did it. Or they were ordered to do it by a gang leader. The vision of armed pitiless monsters roaming the plains is worse than any apocalyptic dystopia from any zombie-loving director. And the idea that a subculture might exist that easily yawns, stretches and moves into hunt-and-murder mode is too much for any thinking, civilized people to consider.
No comments:
Post a Comment