The general decline in standards today

[HoosierDaddy]

Probably not. But the fact that the theatre had no security at all in place for an event with three sold-out auditoriums makes me cringe. Not only it is it epically incompetent theatre management, it's an invitation for Sammy J. Shyster to jump in and file a mass lawsuit. And the corporate owners of the theatre will throw the local manager under the bus and make some statement about how committed they are to the safety of all customers, blah blah blah. And will then make it the responsibility of the kid in the clip-on bow tie to make sure nobody's coming in armed. It's all about satisfying the legal department, not anything that's expected to actually make any kind of a difference.

I'd bet cash money that within two weeks, there'll be a news story out of Colorado stating exactly what I've said will happen.

As far as midnight shows go, when our local multiplex does them there's always at least two cops on the scene, one at the main entrance and one at the exit door of the auditorium where the event is going on. And we're a town of 8000, so it's not like we have a lot of extra policemen hanging around with nothing to do.

I would bet that happens,too Lizzie.

 

[Feraud]

That's what worries me. Look how "willing" everybody was to allow that.

Exactly. I've curtailed air travel because of that nonsense and would like to not have to avoid movie theaters too. I shouldn't have to be scanned and fondled when taking my wife out for dinner and a movie..

 

[HoosierDaddy]

..all a very expensive pacifier. Can't profile..so grandma must suffer through it...as well as frightened crying kids.
Common sense IS dead.

 

[sheeplady]

Exactly. I've curtailed air travel because of that nonsense and would like to not have to avoid movie theaters too. I shouldn't have to be scanned and fondled when taking my wife out for dinner and a movie..

Wait, you'd rather be fondled by your wife rather than a TSA agent during date night? Wow, and the TSA agents do such a good job of it. I always feel like I should give them a tip.

I just got on a list.

I occasionally have to fly if I want to keep my job. I don't have to go to a movie. The only movies we seem to go to anyways are kids movies.

 

[Red Diabla]

I have to say I'm surprised that everyone here who has commented so far on the Aurora tragedy thinks it's a decline in cultural standards when it's most likely more about continuing to skirt mental health issues here in the US especially.

Since Reagan had his way in dumping hundreds of mentally ill folk into the streets during his presidency, it's obvious to me that the only way mentally ill folk have been dealt with is either by doping them up on every medication possible(which sometimes makes the patient even more sick), or having regular prisons deal with the mentally ill in their facilities. Neither is advantageous for actually solving the problem of dealing with folk who have problems. Which I suppose you can claim is cultural, but isn't it really about money, like every other negative thing that's going on right now? When privately owned prisons get more money to incarcerate as many people as possible whether they're guilty, innocent, mentally ill, or whatever, where's the impetus to actually reform prisoners? There isn't. It's all about money.

The young'un who did this horrible thing in Aurora was immediately called out by his own mother. What does that say about him? I'm willing to take bets he was on antidepressants at the very least, and has had encounters before where the warning signs were there before he pulled this horrific stunt. It's not about guns, or being polite, or a decline of cultural standards, it's where the money trail winds up.

RD

 

[HoosierDaddy]

...Or else he was a brilliant 24 yr old young 'man' who decided to use his intellect to devise an elaborate clever plan to take out as many innocent lives as he could just for the 'thrill' of it. Perhaps his decision..and nothing more. Many persons have had a tragic and terrible childhood..relationships...never really fit in...but have never resorted to anything like this. Maybe it was a choice of illusions of a more simpler darker grandeur than continuing applying himself in a world of responsibities that he just didn't care for. Otherwise..his fault. Of course anything abnormal can be dissected down to a mental illness..then we can blame many...and even share the guilt ourselves...if we so choose.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

I certainly understand your point, and it's well made. Although, as a policeman I have a slightly different view. I keep thinking if there had been one, just one, properly armed and competently trained citizen, this tragedy may well have been averted.

Would that have been legal? Not every state has a "stand your ground" law.

 

[Rudie]

..then we can blame many...and even share the guilt ourselves...if we so choose.

That's actually done with spectacular success in the ancient Hawaiian process called Ho'oponopono. Ho'oponopono means "to set things right". The assumption is that all people are connected. So if someone does something bad (like murder or theft), it means all others are part of the problem. As they are part of the problem, they can take responsibility and do something about it. The process is very loving and forgiving, and it actually works.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

I have to say I'm surprised that everyone here who has commented so far on the Aurora tragedy thinks it's a decline in cultural standards when it's most likely more about continuing to skirt mental health issues here in the US especially.

Since Reagan had his way in dumping hundreds of mentally ill folk into the streets during his presidency, it's obvious to me that the only way mentally ill folk have been dealt with is either by doping them up on every medication possible(which sometimes makes the patient even more sick), or having regular prisons deal with the mentally ill in their facilities. Neither is advantageous for actually solving the problem of dealing with folk who have problems. Which I suppose you can claim is cultural, but isn't it really about money, like every other negative thing that's going on right now? When privately owned prisons get more money to incarcerate as many people as possible whether they're guilty, innocent, mentally ill, or whatever, where's the impetus to actually reform prisoners? There isn't. It's all about money.

The young'un who did this horrible thing in Aurora was immediately called out by his own mother. What does that say about him? I'm willing to take bets he was on antidepressants at the very least, and has had encounters before where the warning signs were there before he pulled this horrific stunt. It's not about guns, or being polite, or a decline of cultural standards, it's where the money trail winds up.

RD

"Calculation and deliberation" for months (http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/22/justice/colorado-theater-shooting/) is the hallmark of an evil mind, not someone mentally ill.

I was very disturbed by what his mother said. Did she alert anyone about his known antisocial behavior since she wasn't surprised?

Psychopathy (lacking a conscience) has no known cure and these individuals usually end up in prison. It's not always a matter of an untreated mental health issue.

 

[Rudie]

What is an evil mind? Nobody is born evil. It's all conditioning. The experiences we make during live condition us to be, perceive ourselves and behave in a certain way. So if someone is evil, he was made evil. And most of these processes are unconscious.

Breivik planned his killings for years. Would you simply consider him evil? He's so thoroughly mentally ill even psychiatrists are stunned by the extent of his lunacy.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

What is an evil mind? Nobody is born evil. It's all conditioning. The experiences we make during live condition us to be, perceive ourselves and behave in a certain way. So if someone is evil, he was made evil. And most of these processes are unconscious.

Breivik planned his killings for years. Would you simply consider him evil? He's so thoroughly mentally ill even psychiatrists are stunned by the extent of his lunacy.

No, it's not always about nurture. Nature is fact, too. Some people are born being predisposed to psychopathic behavior. Antisocial personality, on the other hand, is mostly about nurture.

Read Robert Hare's work with psychopaths and his findings.

In the case of the massacre, he made many choices along the way. Deliberate. Calculating. Evil.

But granted, I could be wrong about him, but I stand by my belief that evil exists.

 

[LizzieMaine]

...Or else he was a brilliant 24 yr old young 'man' who decided to use his intellect to devise an elaborate clever plan to take out as many innocent lives as he could just for the 'thrill' of it. Perhaps his decision..and nothing more. Many persons have had a tragic and terrible childhood..relationships...never really fit in...but have never resorted to anything like this. Maybe it was a choice of illusions of a more simpler darker grandeur than continuing applying himself in a world of responsibities that he just didn't care for. Otherwise..his fault. Of course anything abnormal can be dissected down to a mental illness..then we can blame many...and even share the guilt ourselves...if we so choose.

I think either argument is possible at this point -- he might be crazy, he might be a bitter psychopath, or maybe he just read one funnybook too many. But whatever the specific truth in this story turns out to be, I think it's fair to say that he's a product of a society that planted a lot of this in his mind long before he ever acted on it. It's as the author of that Boston Globe piece said: we live in a culture saturated in adolescent revenge fantasies. And now the chickens are coming home to roost.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

I think either argument is possible at this point -- he might be crazy, he might be a bitter psychopath, or maybe he just read one funnybook too many. But whatever the specific truth in this story turns out to be, I think it's fair to say that he's a product of a society that planted a lot of this in his mind long before he ever acted on it. It's as the author of that Boston Globe piece said: we live in a culture saturated in adolescent revenge fantasies. And now the chickens are coming home to roost.

Which is also why young children shouldn't watch this film which can further desensitize them to and glamorize violence.

 

[sheeplady]

I have to say I'm surprised that everyone here who has commented so far on the Aurora tragedy thinks it's a decline in cultural standards when it's most likely more about continuing to skirt mental health issues here in the US especially.

Since Reagan had his way in dumping hundreds of mentally ill folk into the streets during his presidency, it's obvious to me that the only way mentally ill folk have been dealt with is either by doping them up on every medication possible(which sometimes makes the patient even more sick), or having regular prisons deal with the mentally ill in their facilities. Neither is advantageous for actually solving the problem of dealing with folk who have problems. Which I suppose you can claim is cultural, but isn't it really about money, like every other negative thing that's going on right now? When privately owned prisons get more money to incarcerate as many people as possible whether they're guilty, innocent, mentally ill, or whatever, where's the impetus to actually reform prisoners? There isn't. It's all about money.

The young'un who did this horrible thing in Aurora was immediately called out by his own mother. What does that say about him? I'm willing to take bets he was on antidepressants at the very least, and has had encounters before where the warning signs were there before he pulled this horrific stunt. It's not about guns, or being polite, or a decline of cultural standards, it's where the money trail winds up.

RD

I would agree with you about the mental health, but I really disagree with you when it started. Although the emptying out of institutions (which is what I believe you are referring to) started in the 1970s, with large numbers of them completely closing by the 1990s, the original ideas of a de-institutionalized society were originally strongly supported by JFK. By the late 1960s and early 1970s, concrete plans were in place to start downsizing and closing institutions over the next 2 decades. What was envisioned at the time was that more residential-based care units would be built; however, what we got was de-institutionalization and very few home units built- due in some part to people's resistance to having mentally ill individuals living next door. A large part was due to money, but very few people want to live next to people who have serious mental health issues, especially since under the de-institutionalization plan only those who were an immediate threat to themselves or others would find their homes in such places.

You also have to remember that many of the people who were de-institutionalized from the 1970s onwards should have never been placed in an institution in the first place, particularly in the case of individuals institutionalized as children. Individuals who were the children of unwed mothers, were of low intelligence but not meeting the basic IQ requirements for normal intelligence, as well as the physically or sensory disabled were often institutionalized in either developmental or mentally ill institutions. This doesn't even mention individuals who were institutionalized for behavior seen as outside the norms of society, behavior that today would be considered on the scale of normal.

To be perfectly honest, I don't believe that someone who is mentally ill should be institutionalized unless they are a threat to themselves or others. Outpatient care is much less disruptive to the individual's life and gives a person a heck of a lot more normalcy. I agree that there certainly isn't enough of it, but going back to institutions isn't the way to go.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

On Friday, Heather Spohr at Babble called on everyone to stand behind the parents in Colorado, and to not judge them for their parenting decisions. Spohr lost her 17-month-old daughter, Madeline, in 2009 from complications related to Madeline's premature birth.

“I’m going to say this as ‘loudly’ as I possibly can. Stop shaming the victims. You don’t think a child or baby should go to a midnight showing of a comic book movie? Don’t take your child to a midnight showing of a comic book movie. It’s that simple. But don’t you DARE heap your judgment onto these parents suffering the kind of horror and loss few people can comprehend.”

Babies at Batman. Not time to play the blame game.

This brings to mind another issue that represents a decline in standards. Questioning parents' behavior, like bringing babies and little ones to a violent PG-13 movie, is considered taboo and don't you dare.

Just like it's a free country and parents can bring their babies and children to violent movies, it's also a free country where we can heap our judgement on whomever we please.

And no, I am not blaming the parents for the loss of their children. I blame the evil madman who did it.

 

[Feraud]

If movie theater owners chose to enforce anything I'd suggest turning away patrons bringing young children to latenight movies.
The level of selfishness of these parents is staggering.

 

[Pompidou]

On Friday, Heather Spohr at Babble called on everyone to stand behind the parents in Colorado, and to not judge them for their parenting decisions. Spohr lost her 17-month-old daughter, Madeline, in 2009 from complications related to Madeline's premature birth.

“I’m going to say this as ‘loudly’ as I possibly can. Stop shaming the victims. You don’t think a child or baby should go to a midnight showing of a comic book movie? Don’t take your child to a midnight showing of a comic book movie. It’s that simple. But don’t you DARE heap your judgment onto these parents suffering the kind of horror and loss few people can comprehend.”

Babies at Batman. Not time to play the blame game.

This brings to mind another issue that represents a decline in standards. Questioning parents' behavior, like bringing babies and little ones to a violent PG-13 movie, is considered taboo and don't you dare.

Just like it's a free country and parents can bring their babies and children to violent movies, it's also a free country where we can heap our judgement on whomever we please.

And no, I am not blaming the parents for the loss of their children. I blame the evil madman who did it.

I think the parents who just saw their babies' heads get blown off in their laps by an assault rifle are feeling lousy enough already, and immediately telling them that their choice of movies was inappropriate doesn't sit well with me. We might have lost a lot of moral values in the last hundred years, but I hope the value of rubbing salt in the wounds of victims after a tragedy wasn't one of them.

 

[LizzieMaine]

This brings to mind another issue that represents a decline in standards. Questioning parents' behavior, like bringing babies and little ones to a violent PG-13 movie, is considered taboo and don't you dare.

Generally speaking, whatever happened to babysitters? Why must modern parents feel they have to bring their children everywhere they go, including to events the kid couldn't possibly comprehend or appreciate? I've been given the stink-eye by such parents for making them buy a separate ticket for their three-year-old, only to have Mama end up sitting in the lobby for most of the picture trying to get Little Wonderful to settle down. Makes no sense to me.

 

[PrettySquareGal]

I think the parents who just saw their babies' heads get blown off in their laps by an assault rifle are feeling lousy enough already, and immediately telling them that their choice of movies was inappropriate doesn't sit well with me. We might have lost a lot of moral values in the last hundred years, but I hope the value of rubbing salt in the wounds of victims after a tragedy wasn't one of them.

Oh, please. No one is suggesting that people go up to grieving parents and say: "You shouldn't have brought your kid! Bad parent!" These are public forums where we are discussing the issue of young kids at adult themed movies.

 

[scottyrocks]

What is an evil mind? Nobody is born evil. It's all conditioning. The experiences we make during live condition us to be, perceive ourselves and behave in a certain way. So if someone is evil, he was made evil. And most of these processes are unconscious.

Breivik planned his killings for years. Would you simply consider him evil? He's so thoroughly mentally ill even psychiatrists are stunned by the extent of his lunacy.

Everyone is born different. The best examples are fraternal twins. Right out of the womb they can be complete opposites. One can be a constant crier, needing continuous attention, when s/he is not hungry, the diaper is clean, and everything is okay, and the other can be perfectly content most of the time.

Now, what you do to address the needy baby can go a long ways in determining how that baby mentally grows and develops, but the disposition is there from he get-go. Nature/nuture.