... which should make them suspect, right?
This morning as I listened to the continuing coverage of the senseless and brutal killing of those marines last week, the insights came fast and furiously -- so much so that I almost called in to the station with what seemed so obvious.
They were talking about whether this should be classified as Terrorism or not; what the motives of the shooter may have been; why ISIS was being so successful recruiting young idealistic foreign and domestic millennials; announcing that the FBI had confiscated his computers for removal and studying of his favorite websites; his family and friend's responses to questioning, etc., and all at great cost to taxpayers and aggravated fear of a deepening threat to our well-being as a nation.
When will we stop allowing the "enemy" to set the agenda; the Terms of Engagement?
By the establishing of a policy of shooting to disable instead of shooting to kill, we could eliminate the motivation of "Lone Wolves" who are deliberately bringing about their own demise in as dramatic a fashion as can be created. They can count on our participating in the tragedy -- elaborately, in costume, in armored personnel carriers, in great numbers, in all of the color and style worthy of a legendary Cecil B. DeMille or a D.W. Griffith epic! These young assassins have the power to set all that off at will and turn our police protectors into executioners.
What would my alternative accomplish?
If announced as policy well in advance of the next strike we would rob these disillusioned young men the passage into oblivion after glory. Instead of the cost of investigating every minute detail of their former lives and motivations, ambitions and associations, we would have a live perpetrator to question and/or rehabilitate (if possible).
Would this not be a move toward eliminating the ISIS promise of a glorified martyrdom?
If the potential Lone Wolf would have to consider the possibility of imprisonment and/or permanent physical impairment from the violence of the arrest, could this not serve as a deterrent to the recruitment and kill the "romantic" motivation of martyrdom?
May be worth a try.
And -- I thought of calling in to suggest to the experts just how they were on the wrong track, but then cringed upon remembering how embarrassed I feel for the call-ins while listening to their cockamamie orders to "authority".
But -- after thinking about it over the past few hours -- I'm certain that our marksmen and women are expert enough to shoot the weapons out of the hands of a shooter, if that is what they intend. I'm wondering why that hasn't been considered before now?
Even given the fury and chaos of such an event and the possibility of the shooter being killed in the melee, in my scenario, that death would be accidental and never intentional. In a successful arrest the culprit would be incapacitated and never eliminated. That life is needed in order to have the chance to learn as much as possible about the level of desperation of a generation that may see nothing to live for and little expectation for change in their lifetimes. These tragic events have one thing in common; they're all intended as suicides.
Maybe the greatest motivator of all is not ISIS at all, but the never-ending sense of helplessness ... .
.. but then where could we place blame?