The Theater Shooter Is Caught, but the Real Joker Keeps Laughing

The American Thinker ^ | July 24, 2012 | Oleg Abtashian

[No One Special]

Why is it that in the previous decades, when life was tougher, weapons were widespread, and the ratio of mental disorders was presumably the same, mass shootings were unheard of? Some would say that those people had not yet been corrupted by moral relativism, desensitized by Hollywood's fantasy violence and glorification of crime, or addicted to gory point-and-shoot videogames. All valid points -- yet one major reason hardly gets any notice.

The set of rules for war are different from the set of rules for peace. Wars have always been brutal and soul-sapping; while killing was the norm, there have also been rules to spare innocent civilians. The inhuman murder of a random group of defenseless innocents for no other reason than murder itself was never a part of war -- let alone of peace. What has changed in our 2,000-year-old Western civilization that makes it possible?

Admittedly, the major driving force of cultural change is the education system. Until recently, no generation of young Americans has been exposed to such a massive, centrally planned indoctrination based on the dehumanizing, soul-sapping "progressive" ideology. Accordingly, never before have students dropped out of school in such large numbers, with so confusing and conflicting views of the world and their place and purpose in it, with blurred perceptions of right and wrong, and infected with what I like to call "secondhand envy" and "phantom grievances" (which is similar to the Marxist concept of false consciousness, only not as far-fetched).

The radical "progressive" ideology (a broad term embracing many offshoots of Marxism) dehumanizes people more effectively than any violent point-and-shoot video game ever could. It pits various groups of people against one another by cultivating envy and grievances that are mostly imaginary and secondhand.

[No One Special]

Great article. Well worth the read. Ayers as the real joker.

[Travis McGee]

Effective portable long guns have been around for 600 years. Loaded with multiple heavy shot as a "blunderbuss," they were deadly "assault weapons" of their era, especially when you consider the poor state of medical care for trauma and infection post wounding. The 2nd Amd has been around for 220 years. Multiple-shot handguns are 150 years old. Semi-auto "assault rifles" are 80 years old. Yet there were no maniac massacres to speak of. What has changed is the culture. Dark, nihilistic movies with evil but charismatic "anti-heroes" have only existed in the last 30 or so years. Yet liberals don't want to discuss the smashing of cultural and moral values, only the availability of guns!

[Psycho_Bunny]

“Why is it that in the previous decades, when life was tougher, weapons were widespread, and the ratio of mental disorders was presumably the same, mass shootings were unheard of?”

If the answer to that wasn’t so obvious to the author that he’d be embarrassed to ask it then, he doesn’t have anything to offer the field of thought.

[jeffc]

I remember reading something, somewhere about a theory that years ago, when there was plenty of land still considered wilderness, that those of society that were considered, or considered themselves, outcasts, misfits, etc, went to live in those wild, untamed areas away from "polite, ordered society". It was like a release valve. They had somewhere they could go to be themselves and not "trouble" the rest of society.

Today, we don't have that. There is no "wilderness" for society's "misfits" to go. Their societal rage builds up and they pop, go "postal".

OK, it was for a psychology class and it was just a theory, but it kinda' makes sense, eh?

[MrEdd]

Umm no. Not a great article.

The piece shoots itself in the head with a .50 browning in the first sentence. Sadly, if there were ever a time when The American Thinker had more fact checkers than The New York Times, it is long gone.

There have ALWAY been mass shootings now and then.

The overall premise dies before being born, aborted by the stupid and indefensible opening sentence.

[Twinkie]

There was a time when all the men and a few of the women in that theater would have done either a concealed carry or an open carry. Most of them would have been good enough shots to dispatch this shooter, too. - These types of Jokers would know it (they did back then, too) and it would have served as a deterrent. If the next Joker gets shot directly in the gas mask, that’ll stop it for a long while.

[No One Special]

Whoa, tough crowd here tonight, LOL.

[No One Special]

I understand the theater specifically asked patrons not to use conceal carry. There were signs advising of this.

[OldPossum]

There have ALWAY been mass shootings now and then.

You may well be right, but I came of age in the 1950s and I cannot recall any mass shootings during that time. Maybe there were and my memory is fauly. The first one I can recall occurring was in the early 1960s, that of the guy in Texas who placed himself in a college tower and randomly shot people with a rifle until the police shot him dead.

[MonicaG]

Not when you think of the Unibomber...

[Cvengr]

"Wars have always been brutal and soul-sapping; while killing was the norm, there have also been rules to spare innocent civilians"

This has always been the liberal anti-military mantra, which actually allows liberal progressives to create their own self-fulfilling prophecies of atrocity.

Nearly every military war on record has always had vastly more civilian casualties than military casualties.

This is why war zones are characterized by 10 - 100 times more refugees than combatants. 5 armed men will cause 50-500 unarmed people to vacate their homes. 50 armed men can displace 500-5000 unarmed people.

People don't naturally abandon their families, livelihoods, homes, and possessions except where the alternatives are obviously and directly much worse. Even where a glimmer of hope remains, the human affection and hope will drive people to remain in their homeland. When they voluntarily displace, it is for a reason, which isn't good. It's also why they take up arms and go to war, risking their lives to return to their homes, even if re-established elsewhere.

The only times civilians are spared from combat or harm's way is if in a war of attrition their numbers are less important than maneuvering enemy forces, but they also are used as human shields with impunity.

IMHO, the difference in cultures is far greater attributed to a smaller population living through and by faith in Christ. Virtue is not as prevalent and more mature minds were less degenerate when they had arisen from within the ranks of believers. Even with less worldly power, they had greater virtue to overcome the more worldly adversaries.

[CodeToad]

Liberals have never met a tyrant they didn’t love...which is why they are so dangerous.

[Travis McGee]

This is a very effective photo, more than the Nazi WW2 images, because it's current and in color. It's easy to dismiss the old B&Ws as "ancient history." Not so this photo. This evil is happening NOW.

Ray Lahood was just less careful than his cohorts in the administration. He let slip what they all believe.

[MileHi]

Semi-auto "assault rifles" are 80 years old.

What was the first successful self-loading military rifle? Any idea?

[donna]

The USA has murdered 60,000,000 unborn babies.

We have hardened our hearts.

[CodeToad]

My latest creation:

[QT3.14]

Re your Nazi photos:

[RipSawyer]

Depends on the definition of “successful”, in my book I would say the M-1 Garand which George Patton praised so highly. Just an opinion of course.

[Travis McGee]

That’s true, and a great lesson we forget at our peril.

[Travis McGee]

Depends on how you define successful, I suppose. First invention beyond a working prototype? Of first wide introduction to a military? Probably the Thompson SMG (not a rifle, but a long arm none the less), or the Garand and or the M1 carbine. Archy will know!