Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Would you support a law to force the press to withhold the names of spree killers the same way they withhold the names of minors involved in crime?

That simple - yes or no, why or why not?

Answer Question
 
NotPanicking

Asked by NotPanicking at 9:05 PM on Dec. 15, 2012 in Politics & Current Events

Level 51 (421,172 Credits)
Answers (23)
  • No. I want a free flow of information, or as much as possible, at all times. I don't have to like the news, or even read it, but I want it available.

    Once laws start limiting information, it becomes a very slippery slope
    Mrs_Prissy

    Answer by Mrs_Prissy at 9:08 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

  • No, unless it was a minor who did the killing spree.
    louise2

    Answer by louise2 at 9:10 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

  • Once laws start limiting information, it becomes a very slippery slope

    But when you know the main motivation behind these killings is the publicity they'll get, wouldn't removing the carrot from the stick make them less likely to bother?
    NotPanicking

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 9:11 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

  • "But when you know the main motivation behind these killings is the publicity they'll get, wouldn't removing the carrot from the stick make them less likely to bother?"

    But the vast majority of them kill themselves at the same time. They don't know they're getting publicity because they're dead. I get what you're saying; that is there was no promise of glory, they'd be less likely to commit the spree. I'm not sure I believe that. These are people who are sick. They don't operate with the same logic tools as those who are not mentally ill
    Mrs_Prissy

    Answer by Mrs_Prissy at 9:14 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

  • Hmm, interesting question. In one way, I think that the media needs to hold out on reporting things until they know the facts, but at the same time people want to know details. Anyways, I think I will go with no. While I feel bad for the brother that they thought it was, that is something that happens very rarely. The sooner the name of the spree killer is announced the better the police might have at finding out information. Example- The spree killer may have said or acted in a certain way that a person close to him (friend, neighbor, co-worker, relative, etc) may be able to provide details to the police with. Sorry, I know you wanted a simple yes or no, but I can't do simple.

    JeremysMom

    Answer by JeremysMom at 9:15 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

  • They don't know they're getting publicity because they're dead.

    No, but the next 5 guys who plan it DO know. If you have mommy issues and want to kill your parents, you kill your parents. You don't take 20 kids and a bunch of complete strangers with you unless you want to make sure it's on the news 24/7. There are "normal" crimes all the time, the only reason to escalate from "normal" to spree is for the noteriety, to get some kind of message across, no matter how illogical that message is to any sane person. Remove the medium, you remove the message.
    NotPanicking

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 9:17 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

  • he sooner the name of the spree killer is announced the better the police might have at finding out information.

    The press get the name from the police, the police aren't waiting around for the press to tell them. I'm not talking about hiding the identity from EVERYONE, that's ridiculous. I'm talking about removing any mention of it from the news. Call him PscyhoFuck_01, or John Doe, or whatever, just don't give them the fame they're craving.
    NotPanicking

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 9:19 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

  • No (a small part of me says yes though). Reason for my no is because I believe in a free press. I just wish all of them were responsible with the information they glean. I think if they didn't report names there would be more vigilante type action by the public in a search to bring the un-named to justice. As it is with yesterday's tragedy, they were first reporting that the shooter's brother was responsible.

    QuinnMae

    Answer by QuinnMae at 9:19 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

  • Reason for my no is because I believe in a free press

    We redact the names of minors and still maintain a free press. Not seeing how leaving out a name changes that, they'd still be free to misreport all the other salient facts while they walk all over each other to be FIRST.
    NotPanicking

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 9:21 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

  • I understand where you're coming from.

    I stand by my larger concern though. Where does this restriction of the flow of information stop? If we set this precedent, what else could be hushed, to the detriment of the populace? Because you know as well as I do that if we give government an inch, they'll take a mile
    Mrs_Prissy

    Answer by Mrs_Prissy at 9:24 PM on Dec. 15, 2012

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.
close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN