Banning Out Of Blunder?
Earlier this week a senseless crime took place. On the campus of Virginia Tech a gunman rampaged through students, professors, and anyone else who was in his way. While what happened is sad and deplorable, I’m already worried about the backlash that is ensuing.
This guy, who I shall not name, was an English major. He wrote stories. Some, if not all, were riddled with Tarantino-esque violence. There were chain-saw killings of mothers and fathers, kids and friends, stuff that even I admit was brutal.
Yesterday as I was flipping through the channels I was shocked to hear a CNN anchor declaring that this all could’ve been stopped if the writings of this killer had been taken more seriously.
I find this unacceptable. I tend to give everyone a forty-eight hour pass on how they react after a tragedy, but this was downright censorship. The anchor went on to say that such stories should not be allowed to be written and if they are, they should be turned in and red flagged.
This, my friends, is that first fall down the ever more slippery slope. While what happened was sad, it is by no means grounds to limit the creative mind.
Sure, there might be a better argument for gun control-- I mean both groups jumped on the tragedy about thirty-one seconds after the last bullet hit the ground, but I beg of you, please be careful where you side.
In this post-Don Imus world the right to speak, write, or do what we want, within the law, is becoming dangerously under fire. It is ridiculous to believe that if someone would’ve taken this psychopath’s stories and turned them in that this could’ve been prevented.
When what you write can be seen as the way you will act, we are in for a grouping of circumstances that I consider to be dire. With that mind set some of the best books ever written would be planning for some of the most severe crimes that this world has seen. It doesn’t make sense.
When you look at the most violent crimes committed in America there usually aren’t paper trails of violent stories telling you that this person was insane. Timothy McVeigh didn’t write a play about blowing up a building before he did it. Ted Bundy’s murders weren’t documented in his own personal piece of fiction that he worked on in between murders.
I don’t mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist but this can all be linked back to one thing. A large percent of this country wants to ban guns. Take them out the mainstream, which is hard to do, for one reason. The first amendment states Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
If you can start by limiting free speech, which in this case is the right to write whatever you want, you can start curtailing some of the other amendments that fall after the ever important first.
When you change the rules once, they can begin to change them forever. Nothing could’ve prevented what happened earlier this week. When a nut-bag like that guy decides he wants to do something so severe, there is little that can be done to stop him. If guns were illegal, he would’ve gotten one illegally. If his writings would’ve been red flagged, he would’ve just been a red-flagged writer.
But, if you or anyone says that if someone would’ve stopped him from writing what he did, or taken what he wrote as his intentions, you’re wrong. We are allowed to write what we want to write. And if you take away that, you’re taking everything.
This guy, who I shall not name, was an English major. He wrote stories. Some, if not all, were riddled with Tarantino-esque violence. There were chain-saw killings of mothers and fathers, kids and friends, stuff that even I admit was brutal.
Yesterday as I was flipping through the channels I was shocked to hear a CNN anchor declaring that this all could’ve been stopped if the writings of this killer had been taken more seriously.
I find this unacceptable. I tend to give everyone a forty-eight hour pass on how they react after a tragedy, but this was downright censorship. The anchor went on to say that such stories should not be allowed to be written and if they are, they should be turned in and red flagged.
This, my friends, is that first fall down the ever more slippery slope. While what happened was sad, it is by no means grounds to limit the creative mind.
Sure, there might be a better argument for gun control-- I mean both groups jumped on the tragedy about thirty-one seconds after the last bullet hit the ground, but I beg of you, please be careful where you side.
In this post-Don Imus world the right to speak, write, or do what we want, within the law, is becoming dangerously under fire. It is ridiculous to believe that if someone would’ve taken this psychopath’s stories and turned them in that this could’ve been prevented.
When what you write can be seen as the way you will act, we are in for a grouping of circumstances that I consider to be dire. With that mind set some of the best books ever written would be planning for some of the most severe crimes that this world has seen. It doesn’t make sense.
When you look at the most violent crimes committed in America there usually aren’t paper trails of violent stories telling you that this person was insane. Timothy McVeigh didn’t write a play about blowing up a building before he did it. Ted Bundy’s murders weren’t documented in his own personal piece of fiction that he worked on in between murders.
I don’t mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist but this can all be linked back to one thing. A large percent of this country wants to ban guns. Take them out the mainstream, which is hard to do, for one reason. The first amendment states Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
If you can start by limiting free speech, which in this case is the right to write whatever you want, you can start curtailing some of the other amendments that fall after the ever important first.
When you change the rules once, they can begin to change them forever. Nothing could’ve prevented what happened earlier this week. When a nut-bag like that guy decides he wants to do something so severe, there is little that can be done to stop him. If guns were illegal, he would’ve gotten one illegally. If his writings would’ve been red flagged, he would’ve just been a red-flagged writer.
But, if you or anyone says that if someone would’ve stopped him from writing what he did, or taken what he wrote as his intentions, you’re wrong. We are allowed to write what we want to write. And if you take away that, you’re taking everything.
No comments:
Post a Comment