D-Day Vet & wife - murdered by home intruder

[Hyena Dandy]

"Low Enough" would be none.

They are pretty damn low. And we only hear about it when there's nothing else to report. We don't hear about something like this because, well, it's not news. Not when there's the election going on, which was my point earlier when I said "It's election season."

In the election season, things happen that are important. That might effect the fate of the nation. This is a human interest story. It is worth printing to get people upset about how horrible it is, or what have you. But it ultimately comes down to "Something bad happens to people who don't deserve it. Guy who did it captured and awaiting trial."

The guy wasn't famous, so it won't be reported because he's a celebrity. The guy wasn't involved in politics in a major way, it won't be reported because it could sway the election. It doesn't have symbolic value to a local issue. It's not comparable to another, more popular story. It doesn't prop up one viewpoint over another, the way the Trayvon Martin case does (See how we say that blacks are unfairly judged? Look at this) and there's no major failure on the part of the police.

This guy was killed. His killer was caught. It was said he died.

There's really nothing to latch on to. No story. For a story to get big and popular like Trayvon Martin did... There needs to be something to talk about.

[Canarr]

Why was there no outrage from the nation?

Provocative counter-question: why *should* there be more outrage from the nation?

According to this crime statistic here

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime...-Oklahoma.html

Tulsa, OK had about a thousand rapes in 2010, as well as around 200 murders. Where's the cry for outrage for these victims? Why do they deserve less sympathy from your nation? Because they were younger? Because they didn't serve in WW II? Does that make what happened to them any less tragic?

Unfortunately, there's only so much outrage to go around, only so much sympathy to have. The sad fact remains that murders and rapes happen. Yes, it's tragic; but, from the looks of it, contrary to the Trayvon Martin case, this time law enforcement *realized* the tragic of it and set out to do their jobs. What good would pointless displays of outrage do? Let us all band together in internet forums and try to out-do each other in proclamations of outrage and suggestions of punishment for the perpetrators?

You want to recognize the man's contributions to your country? I believe there's a donation fund for the family. Put your money where your mouth is, I believe the saying goes.

[PepperElf]

Are complaints that there is too much violence in the news really complaints that the violence is being covered, or rather that there's so much violence occurring?

for me it's the fact that some violence is getting preferential news treatment while other violence is ignored even though it's worse in nature.


and to be honest i didn't know about it either until my boyfriend told me about it after the vet died. I listened to the story, hoping it would be one of those stories about how an elderly couple owns guns and defended themselves against an intruder.

But alas the ending broke my heart. Not only did a man who defended the country die at the hands of violence... he died i assume knowing his wife was raped and murdered right in front of them.

That's a heartbreaking way to enter into immortality... watching the one you love suffer such violence.

[Hyena Dandy]

for me it's the fact that some violence is getting preferential news treatment while other violence is ignored even though it's worse in nature.

And I explained why earlier. It's because he wasn't famous, he wasn't influential, his death didn't confirm some bias, or illustrate a point, it was properly handled.

What do you want to do? Spend a few weeks talking about how horrible this is? The Trayvon Martin story kept going because there could be debate to it. Some people said it was horrible, some people said that it was reasonable for him to die because he was suspicious, or that he probably attacked Zimmerman.

There was debate, in other words. There was something to talk ABOUT. If there's no debate, a story doesn't keep going. If the Martin story had been reported, and everyone on both sides had said "That was horrible, I can't believe it happened, let's do something" or "That should have happened, everything went down properly" then the story wouldn't have kept going. There would have been nothing to talk about.

The other option is, of course, celebrity trials. When OJ Simpson or Michael Jackson is on trial, it's covered because everyone knows them. We follow celebrities like they're characters in the TV show, and what happens next in the courtroom is the next episode.

[Andara Bledin]

for me it's the fact that some violence is getting preferential news treatment while other violence is ignored even though it's worse in nature.

It was horrific, but there's nothing more to be said.

The violence happened, somebody was caught, there was a postscript about the guy dying, and they're trying to get the other perpetrators.

There's nothing of interest to anyone from anywhere not local or who didn't know the couple that isn't eclipsed by things that are more immediate (both in time and location).

On the national front, there's nothing at all of interest to the nation; at this point, as callous as it is to think this way, it's just another statistic. The headline boils down to "Horrible Things Happened to Decent People," which happens so often that at this point in humanity's maturity that it's not even newsworthy except on a local level.

There are no lessons to be learned, no action to be taken, and no additional awareness that needs to be stoked. Thus, no perceived media outrage.

^-.-^

[PepperElf]

perhaps it's time to change that then.

[Nekojin]

perhaps it's time to change that then.

Why? What actual problem is going unresolved here?

[Hyena Dandy]

perhaps it's time to change that then.

Change what? What lesson would we learn? What could we possibly gain by talking about this?

[Andara Bledin]

Ok. You want change.

What change do you want?

How do you propose that it will be made to happen?

Who gets to decide what change is the right change?

I wish you much luck, but I'd put my money on Quixote having more success.

^-.-^

[mikoyan29]

So what should change? Maybe we should have a government board of things we should be outraged about? And fines issued if we aren't outraged enough about certain things. And if there are enough occurrences of insufficient outrage of things we should be outraged about, we go to a re-education center?

As the other people have said, people get murdered all the time. In my neck of the woods, unless that person is someone famous it may not even make the local news.