For those of you who are still tuned in to the Aurora massacre story, I was the featured expert on a BBC radio talk show today, on whether tragedies like this can be prevented. (The short answer, from my perspective, is “No”). Alongside me were the mother of a young man who was at the theater, another man from the local community of Aurora, and a survivor of the recent massacre in Oslo, Norway. We four were on similar wavelengths, but things got a bit heated when a psychologist from California called in to say that more could and should have been done to prevent the killings by the Man Who Has No Name.
To listen to the BBC's World Have Your Way segment, click HERE.
(Don’t let the 55-minute length scare you; it’s only the first half of the hour-long show.)
I am curious to know how anyone can prevent something this random. As familiar and predictable as this sort of crime has become in a general sense, no one can determine who will snap, when and/or where, especially if that person has no history of destructive behavior?
ReplyDeleteEach case in recent history--Aurora, Oslo, Columbine, Virginia Tech--was committed by a distinct perpetrator and in a location different than the others. This shows that such grandiose killings have no connection other than their nature and the modus operandi. Can the type of killing alone lead investigators to determine and stifle similar occurrences in the future, even when each instance is committed by a distinct perpetrator? How?