Is it reasonable to take precautions after a high profile criminal act? Should you avoid similar locations or situations in the aftermath. My answer is yes and here is why.
There is such a thing as “copycat” crimes and they are documented in a few sources, but even if there isn’t sufficient proof the media is largely to blame does it seem reasonable for them to take a more direct role in responsible journalism. Of course there is, but this is the U.S. media industry who by and large refuse to acknowledge any wrong doing. Instead, they are quick to defend their actions by claiming “journalism”. It is a far stretch to reference anything we see on TV these days as quality journalism, much less responsible journalism and with that being the case what should you do. I believe the media sensationalizes many of these crimes, which would not have the term “high profile” attached to them if it weren’t for their coverage. Coverage necessary to receive to keep ahead of fellow competing news sources in a nonstop bombardment of worthless information.
Transparency that kills
Can we claim the news coverage is really worthless? Honestly, not really and this is where the copycat theme comes into play. It is reasonable to expect the media to overlook the true issue due to the value it plays in supporting their narrative. Instead of reporting on the true source of the issue a fatal combination of despondency, depression, and mental illness they choose to focus on an inanimate object because it supports their narrative. It should be transparent, but many still fail to see the media in their true light.
Moving on to the next tragedy
Some simple protocols to follow would be to ignore the false narrative and focus on the location or situation. Copycat perpetrators will jump at the chance to ride the coat tails of another sensationalized event. In this case, you may want to avoid a movie theater or cinema until the news coverage has lost it’s relevancy. One thing you can count on is the ADHD nature of our country and the media knows it so they will be looking for the next big event or report to help ratings. The negative outcome from this protocol is the affect it may have on seemingly innocent establishments.
“Criminal empowerment zones”
However, are these establishments truly innocent? Just because you hang a “gun free” sign on your entrance and ban the carry of firearms for personal defense does not give you claim to innocence. You are guilty of restricting a fundamental right to life that everyone is entitled to and should exercise on a more regular basis. The whole situation has a one-two combination, the media sensationalize and the establishments create a target rich and defenseless environment. It is not hard to see the temptation by another coward to gain their “5 minutes” of fame and terror.
Vote with your feet
These days is is incumbent on the consumer to make smart choices on where they patronize. Who would have thought part of the choice involved whether your own safety was important or just lip service. You are responsible for your own safety, take it seriously and consider this when you are looking where to spend your money. It may not solve the problem directly, but is it really our problem to solve. Can we solve it indirectly by affecting the businesses, by forcing them to reconsider their “gun free” policy. It is hard to say, but like anything it will not happen overnight.
Avoidance is a solid tactic, it has stood the test of time and here it is equally applicable. Followed closely by an unapologetic approach to your own personal safety.
"The only safety for the conquered is to expect no safety." Virgil, Roman Poet