# Mass shootings and news reporting

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-and-news-reporting/736240>\
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion\
**Created:** [October 31, 2015, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-and-news-reporting/736240 "2015-10-31T06:18:33Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Doctor\_Jackson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctor_jackson/32/32_2.png) [@Doctor\_Jackson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doctor_Jackson)\
**Post date:** [November 5, 2015, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-and-news-reporting/736240/21 "2015-11-05T19:13:36Z")

</div>

I think that news outlets could make a difference by reporting the about event, but not about the perpetrator. These shooters, as a rule, don’t want to die in obscurity. If they did then they wouldn’t take dozens of innocents with them.

The problem is that in today’s world it’s an academic argument. All it takes is one friend of the family with a Twitter account to post the perp’s details and within hours everyone with an internet connection could know as much as they want. Some of these deranged individuals may even consider that “cooler” than traditional news coverage.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\
**Post date:** [November 5, 2015, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-and-news-reporting/736240/22 "2015-11-05T20:45:29Z")

</div>

> [@TBG](#):
>
> Not that I think a ban could be done at all, but it’s certainly amusing that people that have no problem shredding the 2nd amendment would balk at doing anything to limit the 1st (BTW, not talking about anyone here necessarily, just in general).

I’m amused at all the people who are staunch defenders of the 2nd amendment, but fully supported the wholesale repeal of the 18th amendment. Because if you support any one part of the Constitution, you must support all parts of it, or you’re a hypocrite.

And don’t even get me started on those waffling reprobates who reject the 3/5 compromise! That one wasn’t even an amendment! It was part of the original document!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\
**Post date:** [November 5, 2015, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-and-news-reporting/736240/23 "2015-11-05T20:48:04Z")

</div>

> [@Miller](#):
>
> I’m amused at all the people who are staunch defenders of the 2nd amendment, but fully supported the wholesale repeal of the 18th amendment. Because if you support any one part of the Constitution, you must support all parts of it, or you’re a hypocrite.
> 
> And don’t even get me started on those waffling reprobates who reject the 3/5 compromise! That one wasn’t even an amendment! It was part of the original document!

The 16th Amendment is probably even more controversial.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-shootings-and-news-reporting/736240.md?page=1)