A New Paradigm? Or Just Nuance?

| July 24, 2011

The silly terms in my title annoy me.

Some asshole in Norway committed a sort of “terrorist act” to promote his world view.

I simply can’t make much more of the events in, and around, Oslo than that.

What possible difference does it make as to WHY?  Well, there is something to be said for recognizing patterns IF one simply acknowledges them and uses them realistically. In our PC world recognizing a pattern appears to begin the process of making (and looking for) excuses.

The Lone Gunman… The Lone Gunman With an Agenda… The Lone Gunman With an Agenda From a Broken Home… Etc.

What I look at is the number of clearly terrorist acts, as defined thus :

violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands.

Then I  examine the frequency and source.

One Lone Gunman simply isn’t a group! But there IS a group out there…

The whole ‘defining the problem’ exercise seems lost.

 

Category: Geezer Alert!, General Whackos

5 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Doc Bailey

I have to admit I was not prepared for how vehement the debate got over this asshole. I do think there are points to be made about CCWs and the point about running Towards danger, also that there IS a danger, and that we need to confront it.

streetsweeper

Zero, you left out “lone wolf”…..some “anonymous” dickweed put that out in a story about it too. Just saying…

Miss Ladybug

If y’all haven’t seen it, on the topic of running TOWARDS the danger, is a piece from Grim over at Blackfive.

Doc Bailey

I saw it. I think there is a case study for VT and Oslo. If one discounts the bombing, and focuses on the actual shooting, there is a certain difference. The acts of many students and teachers, one might consider heroic. In some cases teachers or students tending to wounded, and blockading the doors (despite being shot THROUGH the door). Part of this may have been because it was indoors, and Oslo was outdoors, but it is clear that Cho certainly fired enough, and there were certainly enough people to match the body count in Oslo. But I think that The blind panic and the inability to take immediate positive action, will have an effect in crisis situations. The ability to return fire, would have cut the number of casualties.

It remains to be seen what the details are of the actual shooting, but I do think there is merit to debate the responses.