Unintentionally, people are becoming activists. In a nation accusing itself of political apathy, political activism is being outsourced into the anti-social ranks of America. Certainly, policymakers have to take into consideration this potential for a secondary citizenship.The Oikos University shooting is "the nation's biggest mass school shooting since Virginia Tech." "Goh, who was born in South Korea...bought a gun and a few weeks later open[ed] fire at the college on Monday in a rampage that left six students and a receptionist dead and wounded three more, authorities said."
Now terrorist protest has been looked down upon for a while now ever since a little brown man defeated the largest empire in the world. But what can we do if it is a natural phenomenon? That is, Goh's attack on Oikos, as tragic as it may be/has been, is not something that was planned to be a show against the remarkably unfair system we have today.
The man, "who," according to police Chief Howard Jordon, "couldn't deal with the pressures of life," slaughtered seven and wounded three more to irrationally get back at his bullies.
Certainly, this is the short-term cause, but there is more at play. This sort of action is what non-violent and violent revolt strives to simulate. Whether through bussing, hunger strike, or assasination, the revolutionary seeks to bring to the forefront problems that are otherwise ignored by the mainstream. Goh has, however inadvertantly, done this.
These "pressures" should not be pushed to the side, as Howard Jordon does. They are important, and, if for no other reason, for the one presented by Goh.
But first, what are these pressures? "Goh...felt disrespected by teasing about his poor English skills at the Oakland school." Indeed, bullying is a serious issue in our society.
Goh has shown us that bullying will cause people to become anti-social, to take up arms against the society that so haunts them. It is a crime, but it is also a disease, whose virus can be killed.
Goh's case follows the book. "He was chased by crediotrs. He grieved the death of his brother," and then there's the bullying. Sure, Goh will more than likely be given the death penalty. It is legal in California. But we must ask ourselves, will killing Goh rehabillitate him? Will looking at Goh's case as an independent, isolated one prevent this sort of crime?
Crime committed by those who "who couldn't deal with the pressures of life" is the oldest kind. But let's take a recent example. Jared Lee Loughner killed six in an assasination attempt against Congresswoman Giffords. There is no single reason for Loughner's mistake, but the one that makes the most sense is because he was ignored by the Congresswoman.
These reactions are inherent in certain personalities.These men who murder are toyed by the emotions of injustice, of one form or another. Had they strategized the best way to achieve their agenda, attempting to kill the congresswoman or actualling killing six or seven people totally uninvolved would not be on the top of the "to do" list.
Then, their actions are sure to repeat if these "pressures of life" are imposed on another like-minded individual.
We cannot changed people's reactions to injustices. Some people have more "radical" reactions to injustices. To the things that Goh encountered, many immigrants, speaking from first hand experience, just shrug their shoulders and walk away.
Every now and then people inevitably will come and react to injustice, some in pacifist ways, others in more violent ways; however, as nature tends to snap back into equilibrium, the establishment, to perpetuate these injustices through the illusion of serving justice, creates the police force.
Consider the following hypothetical, keeping in mind that I am, in no way, advocating for violence against bullies, or murder in general.
Suppose that we were living in a society controlled in every way, but anarchy ruled bully-related crime. There is no punishment for killing someone, whether a bully or not, if that killer is a victime of bullying. And suppose if there it is unconstitutional to make it a law to illegalize murders caused by bullying. What will happen? Bullying itself will become illegal.
So why isn't bullying illegal now? Why isn't direct democracy void of middlemen congress members made? There is no pressure.
The establishment pacifies the demos by convincing them that 1) rendering the "criminal" unable to commit further "Crimes" - or inadvertant motions of revolution against injust established policies, and 2) it conveys to the public a message: that, by the powers vested in the police force, such actions will not be taken, but they inevitably will as they have.
As the people, however, we must end these murders. Jailing and killing - no doubt, murdering and thereby becoming the "evil" we see to destroy - these already victimized persons does not solve the problem.
I am not suggesting that we take policy just to stop killers, as if killing should be a form of policymaking. Rather, this form of inadvertant murder is caused directly by an implication or effect of the issue, which said policy will try to solve. Only this sorts of murder can be solved by policy, but, nonetheless, it can be solved by policy.
Quoted material: AP News. Terry Collins, "CA Attack Suspect upset about expulsion, teasing." http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jL76F6RHY_VQ3GHjlnZ_RMbbaFaw?docId=a85e2b95ff08411fb5bf87e03a6b3f09
No comments:
Post a Comment