Media Bias/Jumping to Conclusions

Well, we all know that the media has a tough job attempting to remain unbiased while reporting as much of the truth as is possible using the written word, but I read something in the newest Time disturbed me.

In yet another article investigating violence in schools the case of Elizabeth Catherine Bush (an eighth grader who shot a classmate) is detailed in a sidebar. Three paragraphs in, this text is read: "She idolized pacifists like [Martin Luther] King but studied martial arts and had once practiced her shot at the firing range with her father." (italics mine)

As if studying martial arts was contrary to 'studying' peace. Perhaps I'm over-reacting. Granted, this line is taken somewhat out of context, but does anyone else get the same impression from reading this line?

lyam wrote: In yet another article investigating violence in schools the case of Elizabeth Catherine Bush (an eighth grader who shot a classmate) is detailed in a sidebar. Three paragraphs in, this text is read: "She idolized pacifists like [Martin Luther] King but studied martial arts and had once practiced her shot at the firing range with her father." (italics mine)

Not really responding to your question but it really surprises me to see a young girl do this. That is very abnormal to the best of my understanding.

Marial arts are done (primarily) by martial people, army, police etc. Of course the media sees them as violent because, normally speaking, they are. So anyone who does them is assumed to be violent. It's just another media label... left/right pro/anti whatever. What should concern you more (I take it you're from the USA) is the shocking gun culture that you allow your children to be part of from a young age, that is accepted as a 'good thing'. Perhaps they wouldn't shoot each other so much if you took away the easy availability of guns for them. Of course, that's just my opinion.

mj wrote: What should concern you more (I take it you're from the USA) is the shocking gun culture that you allow your children to be part of from a young age, that is accepted as a 'good thing'. Perhaps they wouldn't shoot each other so much if you took away the easy availability of guns for them. Of course, that's just my opinion.

Yeah? How else they gonna open my beers?

I would blame absentee and apathetic parenting far more quickly than a "shocking gun culture". I think that parents who are present and active in their child's life are going to do far more to keep that child from acts like these than a child left alone.

Perhaps without the guns, the shootings would be less, but what form would the same desperation manifest itself in? I am actually a proponant of gun control, but I don't think that attacking the weapon in this case solves the problem.

THAT'S what concerns me more.

Wasn't the dad taking her to the shooting range?
'Perhaps without guns, the shootings would be less'. ? What an interesting thing to say.

I was taught to shoot at early age (7) and I've never taken a human life. I had a strong mother and father who taught me respect for life and to obey them. They never allowed me to take a weapon out of the house without their permission.

In spite of the fact that I was initiated into our "shocking gun culture" at an early age it did not turn me into a sociopath. In fact, I really hate injuring people, and that's why I study Aikido.

I thought about taking out that bit about guns from the quote, but eventually decided that it too was relevant.

mj opined:What should concern you more (I take it you're from the USA) is the shocking gun culture that you allow your children to be part of from a young age, that is accepted as a 'good thing'. Perhaps they wouldn't shoot each other so much if you [me? ] took away the easy availability of guns for them. Of course, that's just my opinion.

Well, in response to that can o' worms I unintentionally opened, I can only say that removing guns is not the solution nor is it a valid stop-gap measure.

I just wondered if martial arts were unjustly, though perhaps, unintentionally maligned.

I think that the martial arts were maligned intentionally in this case, Sean, or they wouldn't have mentioned her studies. Unfortunately, martial arts films and events have created a brutal image for the arts in many cases.

I can't imagine the motive for doing so, however. I'd sure hate for Aikido to become politically incorrect. I'd hate to violate social convention! TEE HEE.

mj wrote: Wasn't the dad taking her to the shooting range? 'Perhaps without guns, the shootings would be less'. ? What an interesting thing to say.

Yes he was. I went to the range with my father at Boy Scout Camp. Never shot a living creature, and certainly never had a desire to take out my local school bully with a bullet.

Now that the hot button media issue is behind us, how about this: How often did dad (or mom) ask her how things are going at school? Did they talk to her teachers about her attitude and progress? Did they take time to make her feel loved and worthwhile? You didn't mention that the media also reported that she was having "family problems" -- is that of less consequence because it's not about guns?

My point is: Does blaming guns address the REAL problem behind the symptom? When I was in high school (late '80s), the big problem was suicide -- there were knives and guns in schools, but none of these mass shootings. Was it because guns were significanlty less available? I don't believe so. But I'll bet that the number of two parent families and the amount of hours that parents spend with their kids has gone down since then.

All I am saying is blaming guns does not SOLVE the problem.

Yes, without the guns the shootings might be less -- would you be happier with stabbings?

'Without the guns the shootings might be less'

Are we on the same planet?
Of course all of you, hopefully, are normal, sane people. The trouble with your culture is that EVERYONE is allowed a gun, or 20 of them. I'm going to see your culture as what you allow the lunatics to do, aren't I. Would you give Jim23 a gun? (Only joking) Only idiots have guns. Only really, really stupid idiots will let their kids play with guns. No disrespect, but.. come back to earth please.

MJ,

Do not criticize those of us that have guns, or legal access to guns. I personally own 2, my parents own several, and both sets of grandparents owned many. In my extending family, 95% of the men hunt. In our family, no one has ever brandished a weapon in a reckless manner and in the, literally, thousands of combined hunting trips my extended family has taken, no one has ever been hurt. Unless you count the time it was cold and one of my uncle's caught his willy in his zipper. The point is, it's not the guns. A gun doesn't miraculously come to life, unlock its case, open the closet door and find someone to shoot. As NYFE said, the real problem is the lack of two parent families, and I add in the divorce rate, the violence on TV, and the lack of suitable punishment we have in this country. However gun control is not the answer. Idiot control is the answer. Let some social cleansing go on, and remove the violent (and uncaring/unconcerned parent) types from our society, permanently. Personally like the way Nicaragua handles things (or at least used to) like drunk driving. First offense, jail time and suspened license. Second time, death.

Oh, that wasn't very aiki-like was it?

But that's just me. People are the problem not the martial arts, knives, guns, cars, drugs, etc...

And why is it that you think only idiots own guns? Maybe only idiots study judo for 20 years, maybe only idiots study aikido. Maybe only idiots drive cars, or ride motorcycles, or own a computer, or eat food. Why eat? We should all be able to harness our ki and allow it to provide the energy to sustain life, and enable ourselves to live forever, and those of us that can't...well, they are idiots. Maybe only idiots live in Scotland, or Germany, or Florida (uh ok bad example with the voting incident - lol), or here in Michigan where I am. I'd like to know what your thinking is behind why, as you seemed to have blanket covered, anyone who owns a gun is an idiot? Because you don't like them? Well more people are killed with cars than guns, so maybe only idiots own cars. If I'm not mistaken, and I may be, more people die of drowning each year than being shot with guns, so maybe being around water makes you an idiot. The point it, you lost all credibility, with me at least (and I'm sure some others) when you categorized every single gun owner into being idiots. I think that categorizing makes someone an idiot, or at the very least - ignorant.

Sorry, but I had to rant.

The trouble that I see with media classification of the martial arts is that they don't really take the time to get to know the art themselves, or the people sincerely training. Like little children they are distracted by bright, shiny things and in the MA world those things are the egotistical hard-asses who are ready to go to blows at any time to resolidify their position as the dominant thing walking the streets.

Of course, the sad thing is that this same sort of judgment-before-knowledge (there has got to be a nice latin or french phrase for that, doesn't there?) is also the basis for a lot of the arguments against guns. "What?! Someone was shot? Let's ban guns!" Easy. Case closed. There is no, "Oh, she was coming home every night to an empty house? Her parents were emotionally vacant? Going to the gun range was the only thing she ever did with her father, so this must have been her ill-advised way of trying to reach out..."

Each case is different, and case by case, there are more civilized, polite gun owners than these bright, shiny stories we hear about violence. Don't get distracted. The truth of it is that if that girl had never gotten out of bed that morning this tragedy would never have happened. So, really, we shouldn't let young girls out of their parents house until they are of child-bearing age and properly married. Is that shiny enough that I could get on the news?

mj wrote: 'Without the guns the shootings might be less' Are we on the same planet? Of course all of you, hopefully, are normal, sane people. The trouble with your culture is that EVERYONE is allowed a gun, or 20 of them. I'm going to see your culture as what you allow the lunatics to do, aren't I. Would you give Jim23 a gun? (Only joking) Only idiots have guns. Only really, really stupid idiots will let their kids play with guns. No disrespect, but.. come back to earth please.

Why would I ever take comments like "Are we on the same planet" and "come back to earth" as disrespect?

And no-one in Scotland (where I take it you are from) owns a gun? There are no hunters, sport shooters, collectors, criminals? And no-one has been killed needlessly, senselessly by a gun there?

Just F.Y.I., not everyone in "our culture" is allowed a gun. 1 or 20. There are laws. They are broken, yes, and criminals and children get guns that they should not have and this is NOT RIGHT. But it is also not the NORM. I know few people who own handguns (outside of the police or related fields). Some ARE idiots, most of them are VERY RESPONSIBLE.

Yes "Only really, really stupid idiots will let their kids play with guns" -- I agree with that 100%! But there is a difference between playing and learning to use a weapon properly. There is a culture of hunting in our country (as there is in yours). Do parents wait until their child is 16, 18, 21 before handing them a deadly weapon and letting them join in? Or do they train them properly from an early age to respect and properly use this dangerous tool. (Personally, I know I was a lot more ready to listen to and respect my elders at 12 than I was at 16.)

I think we are firmly in the area of "agree to disagree" here -- but be careful of painting in such broad strokes. Too often your message becomes impossible to see.

mj wrote: What should concern you more (I take it you're from the USA) is the shocking gun culture that you allow your children to be part of from a young age, that is accepted as a 'good thing'. and The trouble with your culture is that EVERYONE is allowed a gun, or 20 of them. I'm going to see your culture as what you allow the lunatics to do, aren't I.

mj:

I believe you are unfairly categorizing all citizens of the USA as allowing their children to be part of a "shocking gun culture," and frankly I take offense at it. Would it be fair for me to say that everyone in Scotland is a bunch of whiskey swilling, kilt-wearing folk who speak a back country brogue and do nothing but sit around all day eating haggis and breaking wind into their bagpipes? Probably not. I urge you to choose your words more carefully unless your intention is to incense people. If that is the case, then you have succeeded.

By the way, I don't think gun violence exists only in the USA. Might I remind you of the Dunblane Massacre on March 13, 1996, in which a lunatic named Thomas Hamilton shot and murdered 16 innocent schoolchildren and their teacher in Dunblane, SCOTLAND.

Magma wrote: The trouble that I see with media classification of the martial arts is that they don't really take the time to get to know the art themselves, or the people sincerely training. Like little children they are distracted by bright, shiny things and in the MA world those things are the egotistical hard-asses who are ready to go to blows at any time to resolidify their position as the dominant thing walking the streets.

Amen! Which sells more papers:

Little girl felt isolated at school and had family problems. As a way to try to reclaim her power she took the most powerful item in her world and used it to show that she is not to be ignored or bullied.

or

Little girl taught to shoot by father, also trained in "Eastern" martial arts, terrorizes schoolmates in random shooting incident

I'm not saying either was printed anywhere in the media -- I'm just asking, which is closer to what you think you'd see in the media?

MJ said:

Are we on the same planet? Of course all of you, hopefully, are normal, sane people. The trouble with your culture is that EVERYONE is allowed a gun, or 20 of them. I'm going to see your culture as what you allow the lunatics to do, aren't I. Would you give Jim23 a gun? (Only joking) Only idiots have guns. Only really, really stupid idiots will let their kids play with guns. No disrespect, but.. come back to earth please.

The disrespect may not have been intended, but that was one of the most disrespectful posts I've seen on this board in a long time. I'll not argue with you, but I'd like to point out that your absolutist, closed-minded attitude has an eerie resonance with the similarly closed-minded rhetoric of the gun nuts you are attacking.

Neither stance is going to help resolve the conflict surrounding guns and gun violence.

-Drew Ames

Hey, I have to agree. Guns aren't the problem; people are. But really, think about the logistics involved here. There's no quick fix, or even a fix in several years that will change the way people think and raise there kids. Some kids dont have the luxury of being raised under close supervision or a good neighborhood. Some have great parents, but awful surroundings.

So then you look at what causes the majority of the homicides and guns seem to be high up on the list. For instance, I just heard of a shooting (not sure if its the same one or not...) where a kid shot and killed 2 and seriously injured 16 others. Do you really think this kid would've done as much damage with a knife or a pencil as a weapon? Could've gotten 1 or 2 yea, but then he's taken down and disarmed. Guns kill more people quicker, and thanks to their ease of use they are a common choice of weapon for murder.

By the way, I too was raised and taught how to shoot at a young age, great parents, decent environment, luck, etc. Not all youngsters have that luxury. Why allow anyone to be killed by someone who ultimately chooses to become a killer?

-Jase

P.S. Now that the real topic has been strayed from.. I wanna say that I don't think any serious damage has been done to martial arts because of that letter. The writer has been influenced as well. Perhaps the fighting spirit captured in movies gives it a negative spin, I'm not sure. The movies could easily benefit the arts and the people. But, it sounded rather casually thrown in... a play on the words makes it go that way. I'm sure people could careless about that aspect when compared to the actual incident, and the shooting range seems like a closer link that people would take. (The way this conversation has gone speaks for itself, I would think...)

Hello,

I usually stay out of this type of post, but I must respond. I hate to use an old cliche' but, guns don't kill people, people kill people. That little girl had a lot of problems, going to the shooting range with her father was not one of them (perhaps her father was hoping she would become an Olympic competitor). The main problem was the lack of parental involvement in her everyday life. As a society, we are too quick to place the blame on an inanimate object (the gun) instead of looking more deeply at the problem.

TheProdigy wrote: So then you look at what causes the majority of the homicides and guns seem to be high up on the list. For instance, I just heard of a shooting (not sure if its the same one or not...) where a kid shot and killed 2 and seriously injured 16 others. Do you really think this kid would've done as much damage with a knife or a pencil as a weapon? Could've gotten 1 or 2 yea, but then he's taken down and disarmed. Guns kill more people quicker, and thanks to their ease of use they are a common choice of weapon for murder.

I agree, but then, it's not too hard to make pipe bombs (indeed, though not used yet, they've shown up in the arsenals of some of these kids and in the pre-emptive arrests of some others in the news). These school shootings look to be grand gestures, often not specifically aiming at the people who caused them grief, but randomly shooting. If the guns are removed, kids have great imaginations, what form will the "grand gesture" take?

I said earlier, I believe in strong gun control -- but without dealing with the real problem (if it needs to take 100 years) we are only pushing these kids from one choice to another.

TheProdigy wrote: Guns aren't the problem; people are. ... So then you look at what causes the majority of the homicides and guns seem to be high up on the list.

Wow, you can really see how the anti-gun rhetoric seeps insidiously into our lexicon. I'm suprised to find these two statements in the same post. I think that we are expected to just simply nod at any statement that targets the big bad evil guns. Just stop thinking and nod. And the more we nod, the more statements like the second one from the excerpt above soaks into our culture.

We look for things to blame because it makes us feel better. It's easier to blame the gun - the thing - than to try to understand what happened with the person, especially if that person is yourself. I would say that what causes the most homicides is one person lacking a high respect for life. Now answer why the person doesn't respect life, and you may be on to solving the problem. What many people forget is that a great percentage of the time, learning to use a gun goes hand in hand with learning to respect life.

hmmm. So maybe martial arts was dealt a double low blow by the article... because this respect should have been learned there, too. The girl should have been empowered as a person of worth who didn't need to resort to the violence to get attention. So not only were the martial arts smeared as violent, but what message did the article send to those who thought that martial arts might help another person learn peace and respect. Perhaps that second criticism is valid, though, because why didn't she learn this in her studies? I guess we really don't know how frequent or hard she trained, though...

[quote]NYFE Man wrote:
[b]

mj wrote: Perhaps without the guns, the shootings would be less, but what form would the same desperation manifest itself in

Hmmn, well not a row of corpses in a classroom anyhow.
It's a pretty easy question to find an answer to. Look at a country that has gun control.
andrew

NYFE Man wrote: Yes, without the guns the shootings might be less -- would you be happier with stabbings?

Hell yeah. If a frustrated pair of kids can stab a dozen people without being stopped, who am I to stop them?

Hey, I drink and drive all the time, but I've never hit anybody. If drinking and driving causes others to plough into innocent victims and kill them, it's not my problem, is it? Their parents probably should have done something so they'd drink and drive responsibly, shouldn't they? Hell yeah.

andrew

cbrf4zr2 wrote: Let some social cleansing go on, and remove the violent (and uncaring/unconcerned parent) types from our society, permanently

Yes. Why don't you do that. I'll make you a nice big batch of poison gas and we'll get to work on rounding them up.

Why are you people so paranoid about gun control? We've gun control here and I know several people with rifles or hunting guns. Do you think you're the only person who'll believe you're responsible, because that's what it sounds like.

andrew

[quote]andrew wrote:

NYFE Man wrote: mj wrote: Perhaps without the guns, the shootings would be less, but what form would the same desperation manifest itself in

Hmmn, well not a row of corpses in a classroom anyhow. It's a pretty easy question to find an answer to. Look at a country that has gun control. andrew

What if they choose to use a pipe bomb instead? Or poison? No rows of corpses there? Humans are really good at figuring out how to kill. If the desire is there, the means can be found. I can look at many countries who have gun control... I think it was pointed out re: Scotland in particular, no country (that I can think of) is free of the stain of senseless violence.

andrew also wrote: Hell yeah. If a frustrated pair of kids can stab a dozen people without being stopped, who am I to stop them? Hey, I drink and drive all the time, but I've never hit anybody. If drinking and driving causes others to plough into innocent victims and kill them, it's not my problem, is it? Their parents probably should have done something so they'd drink and drive responsibly, shouldn't they? Hell yeah.

And if you shoot into a crowd of kids and miss, in your eyes I guess you're just as innocent