Updated: Apr 22
Man was not supposed to judge his fellow man. Remember fundamental attribution error?
Today, society is quick to announce judgment without much thought. We can blame Nicholas Cruz for the shooting, but we can’t say that other people had not contributed to it. Chances are they only sinned differently.
Do we not remember from high school guys who were on the brink of killing themselves or others because life was unfair? In the case of Cruz, are we not gonna talk about his teachers who might have abused him, his peers who might have bullied him, the postmodern leftist culture where authorities lie in the name of political correctness, and the mental illness that lies, deception and mistrust breed? Not saying that Cruz was unimpeachable but that his innocent victims might have not been as innocent. Even a dog attacks you back if you keep kicking it. A judge only looks at a criminal's actions. In the criminal's shoes, however, he would have likely done the same. This is a hard pill to swallow. People account for the situation only when they are at fault. They fail to do the same when others are at fault. This is called fundamental attribution error.
We live in crazy times. More people kill themselves than they kill others in both the US and India (just look it up). This should tell every sceptic that something is deeply wrong with society. If Cruz had killed himself, people would have cared about him and asked about his problems, a route many take. The same people who hate him now would have spent hours debating what he was going through. The same people would have gone on suicide prevention marches, trying to prove how nice and caring they are. He became a villain only because he killed others, not himself. Unless we want everyone to end up in jail or in the grave, we must debate on morality, social values, truth, and justice. Or things will get so bad that every skeptic and every proud lawmaker will be brought to the knee. And his pride shall be stripped.
When a crime occurs, it tells us that society is diseased. The criminal is simply a symptom of the disease, just like dry leaves tell us that the plant is unhealthy. Although some may feel motivated to cut them off, they are wrong. Newer leaves would eventually get dry too. This cycle wouldn't end until the plant is treated. Similarly, you can kill all criminals, but new people will eventually grow up to become criminals until society is treated.
Some think that the fear of capital punishment can stop crime. True, but only in the short term. Later generations-- thinking that capital punishment is history-- will once again be sinful, unless we want to make capital punishment mundane. By the way, what kind of sick paradigm is it that makes people behave with fear? Let's not forget murder is an eternal sin. It is wrong at all places at all times. Just because a man is a murderer, it doesn't give another man a right to murder him. You can't solve a crime with another crime. It's like putting out fire with fire. That's crazy. Moreover, society is bound by the higher order to pay for every sin, whether it is committed on an innocent child (abortion) or on the most dangerous criminal. When you spit on the sky, the sky will spit on you. Know that.
If there happens even one crime, it tells us that society is diseased. The solution is to eliminate those elements that turn innocent citizens into criminals. So long we don't have a deeper debate on justice, it is impossible to achieve it. Instead of politicians talking dumb shit on TV, we should have criminals on TV explaining what situations drove them to commit crimes. And we must have them every day so every one of us gets to see what role we play in making criminals. We will then know that our hands are bloody. In criminals, we have merely found scapegoats. And we'll be embarrassed. We must be embarrassed.