(Lori, forgive me for using your situation as my example. You've alluded to some of your challenges -- I think you're a much more thoughtful and controlled person that you do, but you know your mind much better than I. In this case, however, you're a perfect example for an illustration I need to make. If this offends you let me know and I will apologize and remove the entry.)
Going over the morning news. As expected, and perhaps even needed, there are the Monday Morning commentaries regarding the shooter's previous behavior. The quesitons as to why he was not identified earlier, why nothing was done, questions as to what COULD have been done. "We saw this coming..." sort of thing.
Yes, these are questions we need to ask. To understand.
But, but, but...then what? Does everyone who behaves a little oddly now deserve the scrutiny of society? In the same way anyone who looks just "a little too muslim" commonly gets after 9/11?
Where then? Act oddly, get examined? You're a little too hostile, maybe we ought to dig deeper? You're "not of the body", maybe we should up your meds?
There was an episode, "Number 12 Looks Just Like You", of the original Twilight Zone -- one of several in fact -- which dealt with conformity. Of the pacification of society. Yes, we need to identify and help those individuals who are a danger to themselves and to society. The Columbine students. The Virginia Tech shooter. Jared Loughner.
But how do we, as a society, not overreact and condemn the merely different from the potentially dangerous? And how do we ensure that it isn't a moving target, easily adjusted for changing societal needs, then wants, then fears.
In other words: How do we keep from making a Lori Koonce pay the societal price for a Jared Loughner?
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.