Thursday, March 19, 2015

Carlos Hathcock the Marine-

Max poster.jpg      
Because there are positive roles models too!
www.modernamericanheroes.com
 
 
Years ago I read some books on Carlos Hathcock. Marine Sniper- What stuck out in my mind so much was the ability for Carlos to concentrate. There was a story about him crawling through an open field for 3 days! He had to cross this field in order to finish his mission. The only problem was that the enemy was always looking in the field- walking in the field. 
He had to crawl inch by inch for 3 days through this field. Who can do that! Yes I know there are some folk who can but not that many compared to how many are walking the planet. He was chewed on by ants and other insects-  even laughed that he avoided death so many times but was going to be eaten alive and killed by these insects. When he had to go to the bathroom where do you think he did that at? Yep- he could not get up and use the restroom. Sometimes enemy patrols would walk right by him. 
Then after everything that he went through during those 3 days on his belly- he had to get up- make the shot- and then get the heck out of there. Imagine how his muscles felt after 3 days of laying on the ground. It was a successful mission and he always viewed his missions as saving Marines, which he did.   Carlos Hathcock-

I named Carlos after Carlos Hatchcock. This dog had the ability to concentrate fully on one thing at a time- but very intense concentration.  I like to name dogs with a meaning behind the name. 
The ripple effect by all of the lives that Carlos Hatchcock saved keeps on growing. There are some liberal pansies soft bellied folk who will point out that a sniper is killing people. Then there are the people who know that a sniper is saving lives. 

Kinda funny that Carlos was named after a Marine and then plays a Marine--- Semper Fi !!!

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Semper Fi

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/watch-the-first-trailer-for-the-new-doggy-drama-113967402037.html


Here is a link to a movie called max- the lead dog was born here- his name is Carlos- after Carlos Hathcock a very famous Marine. From what I have read about Carlos Hathcock his ability to concentrate was phenomenal! Carlos the dog- well he was the same way. 

Semper Fi-

Thursday, February 12, 2015

Fools and Dogs-

Most dog people will agree on the fact that dogs are typically honest creatures where as humans are deceitful.  I get folk coming over to my place who wish to appear honest and of good character  but eventually their true intentions come out. I also get folk who come here who are honest and honorable- really good people. Dogs reflect both groups of people.
If a dog does not like you they show it and do not hide their feelings. People will smile in your face and then talk behind your back, nothing new there. Been going on forever and will continue until the Chicago Cubs win the World Series.
It does get aggravating at times though, kinda like ticks in the summer time. Blood sucking parasites that spreads diseases, people gossip. I have learned to keep a healthy distance when dealing with the public because that saying " God is great beer is good and people are crazy" is so true.
People look at my course and will copy stuff from that and then have no idea what they are doing with it. Its not about climbing, jumping, walking, crawling- it is not about that at all. They will emulate things that they see you doing but do not understand why you are doing it. They are full of excuses when their dogs do not listen to them and tend to treat their dogs as "children."
If their dogs do not perform- they blame the system or personally attack you. Again, they have many excuses and they also gravitate to people who also make excuses.
You will not find me saying anything negative about any other dog trainer out there. There are many so called dog trainers that do indeed like to put down someone else in an effort to make themselves look good. That only shows their lack of confidence, integrity and experience.

Let your own work prove yourself and if you cant say anything positive- keep quiet. When you open your mouth and talk that way, everyone knows what a fool you are-

Stay happy :)

Monday, January 19, 2015

PTSD

Post-combat insight from Lt. Col. Dave Grossman


Chuck,
Just read your latest article. Well done. Your usual great work at presenting the information. To get people "re-blued" or "re-calibrated" after a combat deployment I recommend that agencies put the police officer thru a series of video simulator scenarios. This is a tremendous tool to help ID any problems, and to get the individual back on track.
However, I'd like to submit the "rest of the story." You ID'd three cases where there were problems, and no doubt there are others, BUT, a) we don't know if these would have happened anyway, b) we can both find a LOT of examples of officers who were NOT in the combat zone who made the same kind of mistakes, and (most importantly) c) in most cases the returning combat veteran is a superior asset for the agency.
Remember, in WWII we had 11 million men in uniform. Remember "Saving Private Ryan?” Most of the WWII vets saw things we can't imagine, many of them were there for 2, 3, and even 4 years on end, and they returned to the US as superior members of society. They were the "Greatest Generation" and a new greatest generation is now coming home.
These new combat veterans have all the advantages that we associate with the seasoned old WWII/Korea veteran cops that some of us 'old timers' remember. I remember how my dad, a beat cop in the 60's, looked up to the WWII/Korea vets. The WWII/Korea vets were his heroes, and the best thing he could say about them was that they were in combat in WWII or Korea. As far as he was concerned, that said it all. They are cool under fire, less likely to over-react, and most of them are better able to deal with stress. After combat, everything else in life can be a cake-walk.
Indeed, these new veterans may be better able to perform police duties than the veteran of Normandy, Anzio, or the Pusan Perimeter. The WWII and Korea vets were in constant high-intensity warfare. Our new vets were deeply involved in nation building, in an environment in which too much violence can be detrimental to the cause and is often severely judged and immediately punished.
Below is an extract from the 2d edition of On Combat that addresses the problem of finding “balance” in our care for the returning veteran.
With thanks for all that you do for the community.
Hooah!
Dave

Excerpts from PoliceOne National Advisory Board Member Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, from the second edition of his bestselling book On Combat
[In] this age of sensational tabloid journalism, the media can encourage our returning warriors to wallow in the pity party by presenting endless reports and exaggerated "news" pieces implying that virtually every veteran of the war in the Middle East is suffering from full-blown PTSD. This can create dire consequences, as we shall see in a moment.
Here is a letter that I often send the press in response to their queries about the military and PTSD. It’s taken in part from an article of mine that appeared in Greater Good magazine:
==================
Today I am on the road almost 300 days a year speaking to police agencies and numerous military organizations deploying and returning from combat. I teach them that there are two dangers they must guard against. One is that of the “Macho man” mentality that can cause a soldier to refuse to accept vital mental health services. The other danger is what I call the “Pity party.”
Interestingly, the very awareness of the possibility of PTSD can increase the probability that it will occur. There is a tendency for human beings to respond to stress in the way that they think they should. When soldiers, their spouses, parents and others are convinced that the returning veteran will suffer from PTSD, it can create a powerful self-fulfilling prophecy.
I decline most requests for media interviews because of my time-intensive traveling and teaching schedule. I also decline them because I refuse to be part of that "drumbeat of voices" that tells veterans that they are doomed to a lifetime of psychological trauma. I tell the media the truth but then they edit out anything that does not support their belief that “the war will destroy all the soldiers and we'll pay a price for generations to come.” This sensationalist “if-it-bleeds-it-leads” journalism is irresponsible because it can cause more harm to our warriors.
Sadly, it is not difficult to find people in the mental health community to support the thesis that anyone who kills, experiences combat, or witnesses violence (or any other fill-in-the-blank 'victim du jour') is doomed to lifelong PTSD and, consequently, needs lifelong mental health care. Too few mental health professionals communicate to their patients that 1) they can recover quickly from PTSD and that 2) they will become stronger from the experience. Yet that expectation must be there if there is to be hope of anything other than a lifetime of expensive counseling.
Here is what I tell all my military and law enforcement audiences:
PTSD is not like pregnancy. You cannot be “a little bit pregnant;” either you are, or you are not. PTSD is not like that.
PTSD is like being overweight. Many people carry around 10, 20, or 30 pounds of excess weight. Although it influences the individual every minute of every day, it might not be a big deal health wise. But for those people who are 500 pounds overweight, it will likely kill them any day now. There was a time when we could only identify people who had "500 pounds" of PTSD. Today we are better at spotting folks who carry lesser loads, 30, 40 or 50 pounds of PTSD.
I have read statistics that say 15 percent of our military is coming home with “some manifestation of psychological problems.” Others claim it is 20 percent and still others report 30 percent. Well, depending on how you want to measure it, 30 percent of all college freshmen have some manifestation of psychological problems. Mostly what is being reported on today are people with low levels of PTSD (30, 40 or 50 pounds of PTSD) who in previous wars would not have been detected. We are getting damned good at identifying and treating PTSD and, when the treatment is done, most people are better for the experience.
PTSD is not like frostbite. Frostbite causes permanent damage to your body. If you get frostbite, for the rest of your life you will be more vulnerable to it. PTSD is not like that.
PTSD can be more like the flu. The flu can seriously kick your tail for a while. But once you shake it off, you probably are not going to get it again for the rest of the year. You have been inoculated. PTSD can kick your tail for a while (months and even years). But once you have dealt with it, next time it will take a lot more to knock you off your feet because you have been stress inoculated.
When I was a kid, World War II veterans were everywhere. They were our police sergeants, captains and chiefs. They were our battalion commanders and our senior NCOs. They were our business leaders and our political leaders. The idea that a World War II veteran was a shallow, fragile creature who would break under pressure was ridiculous. (There were some people like that; everyone knew of a few, but they were rare.)
Nietzsche said, "That which does not kill me makes me stronger." The Bible says something similar many times. For example, Romans, chapter five says: "...we glory in tribulations...knowing that tribulation worketh patience; And patience, experience; and experience, hope: And hope maketh not ashamed." Throughout history, we have understood that bad things can make us stronger.
The World War II generation was the "Greatest Generation" and today a new Greatest Generation is coming home. That is, if we do not screw them all up by telling them (and their families, their neighbors and their employers) that they are ticking-time-bombs doomed to a lifetime of mental illness.
Here is what I believe is the heart of the matter. To harm and destroy people you have to lie:
Lie Number 1: Ignore the vast majority who are just fine and report only on the minority with problems.
Lie Number 2: Fail to report that most PTSD cases are people with only 30, 40, or 50 pounds of PTSD, people who in previous wars would have gone undetected.
Lie Number 3: Fail to report that we are damned good at treating PTSD and that we are getting better at it every day.
Lie Number 4: Fail to report that PTSD can be a step on the path to stress inoculation and that one can be stronger when they come out the other end.
Lie four times over. Lie the worst kind of lie: the lie of omission that gives only the distilled essence of the bad news. Create an expectation in veterans (and their families, employers and neighbors) that they are all fragile creatures who could snap at any time and are doomed to a life of suffering. Get veterans invested in their grievance and in their role as victim. Get them to draw disability from PTSD and convince them that they will never recover.
I want the media to care, but I am convinced that most of them are part of a mob-mentality, a pile-on, if-it-bleeds-it-leads profession that does not care about the harm they do. Remember, this is the same profession that put the Columbine killers on the cover of Time magazine twice – yes, twice - thus giving those brutal mass-murderers the very fame and immortality they wanted. This in turn inspired the Virginia Tech killer who also appeared on every news show and on the front pager of every newspaper in the nation. Sadly, this too inspires countless others as the media continues to be their happy co-conspirators in a murder-for-fame-and-immortality contract.
Please forgive me if I have been harsh but the situation calls for us to be passionate. Yes, some of our veterans will suffer from PTSD and we have an obligation to give them the best possible support. But we also need a balanced, tough love that creates an expectation that they will get over it, get on with it, and be better for the experience. That they will be the new Greatest Generation
I prefer to emphasize the positive expectations. Positive self-fulfilling prophecies. Now there is a nice concept. But will we ever see it in the news?

Monday, January 12, 2015

Subtleties

sub·tle·ty

noun \ˈsə-təl-tē\
: the quality or state of being subtle
: a small detail that is usually important but not obvious

Ahhhhhhh- the essence of dog training and so much more! It does not really make a difference what profession that one is in. You can be a Scientist or a garbageman. A bus driver or a ballplayer. Subtleties make the difference between  average and a true artist in ones profession.  In  dog training they make all the difference. 

There are many examples to give but if you start to look for them you will start to notice many. For instance. One is walking a dog over a walkover and the dog is not used to it. Handler A takes his dog up- dog stops-he encourages the dog vocally and steps away from the dog a little- the dog follows. 

Handler B takes his dog up- dog stops- he encourages the dog vocally - the dog does not move. 

What was the difference? Why did dog A go forward but dog B stay? 

Handler A walked away just a little which propelled the dog to follow him. 
Handler B stood there- dog b was okay with just standing there too. 

Subtlety- 

The definition above says it well- " a small detail that is usually important but not obvious." 

Small details. 

Lets modify that definition a little- " a small detail that is usually important but not obvious to the handler."  The dog reacts to these subtleties whether you are aware of them or not. 

Start looking for them- start doing them- watch the difference in your dogs behavior. 



 

 

 

Sunday, January 11, 2015

One Good Man Doing Something-

Navy Veteran Kendrick Taylor, tells Orlando News 13 that his core Navy values resonated loudly when he saw an elderly woman being attacked by a young man in a grocery store parking lot:
“Honor, courage, and commitment.” he said.
He knew he couldn’t stand idly by and watch this 76-year-old woman get her purse violently snatched after being shoved to the ground.
“What if that was my grandmother?”
Not taking into consideration any potential danger, Taylor ran straight for the culprit, tackled him- hard – and waited for police to arrive.
His act of courage earned Taylor the Medal of Merit from the Orlando Orange County Sheriff’s Office.

 Orange County Sheriff’s Office.
hero
via Facebook/Kendrick Lamar Taylor
Taylor hopes this act will inspire others to do the right thing.
“I think us being Americans, [we] should just stand up for each other, just stand up for what’s right and not look to the other person to try to act on it but act on it yourself and that will make us all better at the end of day.”
From serving his country to serving others, Taylor exemplifies true American spirit.

Great job! One good man doing something!!

Tell it like it is

http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/must-read-ex-fbi-agents-epic-open-letter-to-eric-holder-stuns-administration

Thursday, January 8, 2015

Don't be a victim

http://gawker.com/5993412/brutal-mugging-in-new-york-city-subway-captured-on-video

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/11/chicago-muggings-8-charge_n_1586129.htmlhttp:

//activeselfprotection.com/blog/muggers-viciously-beat-helpless-man/



Don't be a victim- learn what to do and not to do-

When Good Men Do Nothing

June 6th, 2015
Owensboro Convention Center
Speaker: Lt.Col Dave Grossman
Bulletproof Mind



Good and Evil-

Who reading this is fed up with the politically correct world that we live in? Being "offended" is a reason for whining. You can't say this or shouldn't say that because it might offend someone. Whine whine whine... life is not fair...give me give me give me - hey what about me. My skin color is this color so that gives me a right to.....

If folk would "Love thy neighbor as thyself " there would be none of that. That is good sound advice.

Because iniquity shall abound the love of many will wax cold.

Iniquity:
: the quality of being unfair or evil
: something that is unfair or evil
Synonyms
corruption, debauchery, depravity, immorality, iniquitousness, vice, libertinage, libertinism, licentiousness, profligacy, sin
 
That is what everything comes down too- good vs evil. Plain and simple- GOOD vs EVIL

When any person immerses themselves in iniquity there love is going to "wax cold."  Look at the divorce rate- Look at what people do to other people- Look at what parents do to their kids- Look at what kids do to their parents- Look at what people do to animals- look at all of the evil in the world.

Why? Because we are in a spiritual war- against the rulers of the darkness of this world. Thats it. It does not make a difference if you do not believe that you are in a war, it just makes you an easier target. There is a war going on 24 hours a day 365 days a year. Good against evil. Just because you do not see the bombs and bullets flying everywhere does not mean there isn't a battle going on. When a young couple decide to get a divorce because the grass is greener on the other side- that is a battle that evil has won. When people accept immoral behavior as a lifestyle choice- another battle that evil has won. When schools take Gods Word out of the classroom and replace it with the internet--- hahaha a big battle has been won by Satan. Yep, he is the General in charge of evil.

If I offend you now- too bad. Booo hoo hooo.

I see the wind of change affecting many people today. Good is becoming real good and evil is becoming  more evil. You cannot be on both sides of this war. You choose, it's your choice.
Evil is going to try and convince you that being on their side is way better. God is love and he will stand there waiting for you. More and more people are choosing evil over good today for many reasons. It appeals to them and everybody else is doing it and so on and so forth.

The thing is that most people on the side of evil are blinded to certain things. Like the frog being boiled alive in the pot of water because bit by bit they accept and get used to iniquity. They dont look at themselves as being on Satans side but if they examine their lives- they are. God is so awesome and he will gladly accept you back on the side of good but people are content to stay on evil's side.

Satan is not an idiot and was at one time God's greatest creation. He knows he is on the loosing side and is trying to take as many people with him as possible. He is doing very well at that. He does that subtlety... bit by bit...a little bit of lie mixed with truth....slowly over time.

I know that there are some people who do not believe any of this and to them it is not about God and Satan. Their version is way different and well....the Bible is outdated and not accurate and they dont put much stock in it at all. 

All part of the war-

Ima Whiner gets a lot of press and people listen to his rantings. Ima will whine about this that and the other thing and try and get his way. Mr Init Forme is right along Ima saying Amen!

Everybody on God's side- time to make a stand and quit being wimps. If you are indeed a child of God- start acting like one. Be yourself-be happy-be bold- be courageous. Let your light shine so bright that all can see it. Darkness hates light and cannot stand against it. Dont let your light dim in this war.

Let Ima Whiner and Init Forme do their thing and dont pay them no attention, thats what they want.

Good will win when all is said and done- when the smoke clears God will still be God and Satan will be no more.

It's up to you where you will be- plain and simple.

Good or evil

your choice......



Sheep- Sheepdogs- Wolves

On Sheep, Sheepdogs and Wolves

Excerpt from

On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict, In War and In Peace


- By Lt. Col. Dave Grossman and Loren W. Christensen

One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to Lt. Col. Grossman: "Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident." This is true. Consider that the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another.
Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year. While this is a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime, we must keep in mind that there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in one hundred in any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.
Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other except by accident or under extreme provocation.
Let us call them sheep.
Now, we mean nothing negative by calling them this. Think of a pretty blue robin's egg. It is soft and gooey inside, but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful. For now though, civilization needs warriors to protect them from the predators.
"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world who are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.
"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf."
If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, you are an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? Then you are a sheepdog, a warrior, someone who walks the hero's path. You are able to walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed.
One career police officer wrote the following to Lt. Col. Grossman after attending one of his "Bulletproof Mind" training sessions:
"I want to say thank you for finally shedding some light on why it is that I can do what I do. I always knew why I did it. I love my [citizens], even the bad ones, and I had a talent that I could return to my community. I just couldn't put my finger on why I could wade through the chaos, the gore, the sadness, if given a chance try to make it all better, and walk right out the other side."
Let us expand on the old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial; that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools. But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kids' school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is to deny that it could happen. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their children is just too hard for them to fathom.
The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, cannot and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheepdog that intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.
Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray-paint himself white, and go, "Baa."
That is, until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.
The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door. Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?
Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.
Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America, said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." But the sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.
While there is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, he does have one real advantage. Only one. He is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population.
There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory acts of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.
However, when there were cues given by potential victims that indicated they would not go easily, the cons said that they would walk away. If the cons sensed that the target was a counter-predator, that is, a sheepdog, they would leave him alone unless there was no other choice but to engage.
One police officer told me that he rode a commuter train to work each day. One day, as was his usual, he was standing in the crowded car, dressed in blue jeans, T-shirt and jacket, holding onto a pole and reading a paperback. At one of the stops, two street toughs boarded, shouting and cursing and doing every obnoxious thing possible to intimidate the other riders. The officer continued to read his book, though he kept a watchful eye on the two punks as they strolled along the aisle making comments to female passengers, and banging shoulders with men as they passed.
As they approached the officer, he lowered his novel and made eye contact with them. "You got a problem, man?" one of the IQ-challenged punks asked. "You think you're tough, or somethin'?" the other asked, obviously offended that this one was not shirking away from them.
The officer held them in his steady gaze for a moment, and then said calmly, "As a matter of fact, I am tough."
The two looked at him questioningly, blinked a couple of times, and then without saying a word, turned and moved back down the aisle to continue their taunting of the other passengers, the sheep.
Some people might be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But most people can choose which they want to be, and more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.
Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, "Let's roll," which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers - athletes, business people and parents-from sheep to sheepdogs, and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.
Here is the point Lt. Col Grossman likes to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers he speaks to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, as are wolves. They did not have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision.
If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior's path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.
For example, many officers carry their weapons in church. They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs. Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to massacre you and your loved ones.
Lt. Col. Grossman was training a group of police officers in Texas when during a break an officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other officer replied, "I will never be caught without my gun in church."
Lt. Col. Grossman asked him why he felt so strongly about this and the officer told him about another police officer he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual charged in and opened fire, gunning down 14 people. He said that that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if only he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy's body and wait to die.
The officer telling the story looked Lt. Col. Grossman in the eyes, and asked, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?"
Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for "heads to roll" if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids' school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them. However, their only response to the wolf is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones were attacked and killed, and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?"
It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up.
Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: You didn't bring your gun; you didn't train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by fear, helplessness, horror and shame at your moment of truth.
In Fear Less, Gavin de Becker's superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation, he says:
"...denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn't so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling. Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level.
And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes.
If you are a warrior legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be on 24/7 for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself, "Baa."
This business of being a sheep or a sheepdog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9/11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.
Loren W. Christensen's police career began in 1967 when he served as a military policeman stateside and in Saigon, Vietnam. When he got out, he joined the Portland (Oregon) Police Bureau where he served for 25 years in a wide range of jobs, to include street patrol, gang intelligence, dignitary protection, and defensive tactics instructor.
Loren began training in the martial arts in 1965 and has earned a total of 10 black belts in three arts: 7th degree karate, 2nd degree jujitsu, and 1st degree arnis. His slant is, and always has been, the street.
As a free-lance writer, Loren has authored 32 books, dozens of magazine articles, and edited a newspaper for nearly eight years. He has starred in six martial arts training DVDs and videos.
Retired from police work, Loren now writes full time and teaches martial arts.
To contact Loren, visit his website LWC Books at www.lwcbooks.com.
Lt. Col. Dave Grossman is a West Point psychology professor, Professor of Military Science, an Army Ranger, and author of On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society and On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict, In War and In Peace, with Loren W. Christensen.
As the director of Killology Research Group, Lt. Col. Grossman is on the road nearly 300 days a year, training elite military and law enforcement organizations worldwide on the reality of combat.
To contact Col. Grossman, visit his website Killology at www.killology.com.

Wednesday, January 7, 2015

Who's Teaching Our Kids To Kill?

Trained to Kill: Are We Conditioning Our Children to Commit Murder?

By Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
Christianity Today, August 10, 1998

Are we training our children to kill? I am from Jonesboro, Arkansas. I travel the world training medical, law enforcement, and U.S. military personnel about the realities of warfare. I try to make those who carry deadly force keenly aware of the magnitude of killing. Too many law enforcement and military personnel act like "cowboys," never stopping to think about who they are and what they are called to do. I hope I am able to give them a reality check.
So here I am, a world traveler and an expert in the field of "killology," and the largest school massacre in American history happens in my hometown of Jonesboro, Arkansas. That was the March 24, 1998, schoolyard shooting deaths of four girls and a teacher. Ten others were injured, and two boys, ages 11 and 13, are in jail, charged with murder.
My son goes to one of the middle schools in town, so my aunt in Florida called us that day and asked, "Was that Joe's school?" And we said, "We haven't heard about it." My aunt in Florida knew about the shootings before we did!
We turned on the television and discovered the shootings took place down the road from us but, thank goodness, not at Joe's school. I'm sure almost all parents in Jonesboro that night hugged their children and said, "Thank God it wasn't you," as they tucked them into bed. But there was also a lot of guilt because some parents in Jonesboro couldn't say that.
I spent the first three days after the tragedy at Westside Middle School, where the shootings took place, working with the counselors, teachers, students, and parents. None of us had ever done anything like this before. I train people how to react to trauma in the military, but how do you do it with kids after a massacre in their school?
I was the lead trainer for the counselors and clergy the night after the shootings, and the following day we debriefed the teachers in groups. Then the counselors and clergy, working with the teachers, debriefed the students, allowing them to work through everything that had happened. Only people who share a trauma can give each other the understanding, acceptance, and forgiveness they need, and then they can begin the long process of trying to understand why it happened.

"Trained to Kill"
Virus of Violence
To understand the reasons behind Jonesboro, Springfield, Pearl, Paducah, and all the other outbreaks of this "virus of violence," we need to understand first the magnitude of the problem. The per capita murder rate doubled in this country between 1957--when the FBI started keeping track of the data--and 1992. A fuller picture of the problem, however, is indicated by the rate people are attempting to kill one another--the aggravated assault rate. That rate in America has gone from around 60 per 100,000 in 1957 to over 440 per 100,000 by the middle of this decade. As bad as this is, it would be much worse were it not for two major factors.
First is the increase in the imprisonment rate of violent offenders. The prison population in America nearly quadrupled between 1975 and 1992. According to criminologist John J. DiIulio, "dozens of credible empirical analyses . . . leave no doubt that the increased use of prisons averted millions of serious crimes." If it were not for our tremendous imprisonment rate (the highest of any industrialized nation), the aggravated assault rate and the murder rate would undoubtedly be even higher.
Children don't naturally kill; they learn it from violence in the home and most pervasively, from violence as entertainment in television, movies, and interactive video games.
The second factor keeping the murder rate from being any worse is medical technology. According to the US Army Medical Service Corps, a wound that would have killed nine out of ten soldiers in World War II, nine out of ten could have survived in Vietnam. Thus, by a very conservative estimate, if we had 1940-level medical technology today, the murder rate would be ten times higher than it is. The magnitude of the problem has been held down by the development of sophisticated lifesaving skills and techniques, such as helicopter medivacs, 911 operators, paramedics, CPR, trauma centers, and medicines.
However, the crime rate is still at a phenomenally high level, and this is true worldwide. In Canada, according to their Center for Justice, per capita assaults increased almost fivefold between 1964 and 1993, attempted murder increased nearly sevenfold, and murders doubled. Similar trends can be seen in other countries in the per capita violent crime rates reported to Interpol between 1977 and 1993. In Australia and New Zealand, the assault rate increased approximately fourfold, and the murder rate nearly doubled in both nations. The assault rate tripled in Sweden and approximately doubled in Belgium, Denmark, England-Wales, France, Hungary, Netherlands, and Scotland, while all these nations had an associated (but smaller) increase in murder.
This virus of violence is occurring worldwide. The explanation for it has to be some new factor that is occurring in all of these countries. There are many factors involved, and none should be discounted: for example, the prevalence of guns in our society. But violence is rising in many nations with draconian gun laws. And though we should never downplay child abuse, poverty, or racism, there is only one new variable present in each of these countries, bearing the exact same fruit: media violence presented as entertainment for children.


Killing is Unnatural
Before retiring from the military, I spent almost a quarter of a century as an army infantry officer and a psychologist, learning and studying how to enable people to kill. Believe me, we are very good at it. But it does not come naturally; you have to be taught to kill. And just as the army is conditioning people to kill, we are indiscriminately doing the same thing to our children, but without the safeguards.
After the Jonesboro killings, the head of the American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on Juvenile Violence came to town and said that children don't naturally kill. It is a learned skill. And they learn it from abuse and violence in the home and, most pervasively, from violence as entertainment in television, the movies, and interactive video games.
Killing requires training because there is a built-in aversion to killing one's own kind. I can best illustrate this from drawing on my own work in studying killing in the military.
We all know that you can't have an argument or a discussion with a frightened or angry human being. Vasoconstriction, the narrowing of the blood vessels, has literally closed down the forebrain--that great gob of gray matter that makes you a human being and distinguishes you from a dog. When those neurons close down, the midbrain takes over and your thought processes and reflexes are indistinguishable from your dog's. If you've worked with animals, you have some understanding in the realm of midbrain responses.
Within the midbrain there is a powerful, God-given resistance to killing your own kind. Every species, with a few exceptions, has a hardwired resistance to killing its own kind in territorial and mating battles. When animals with antlers and horns fight one another, they head butt in a harmless fashion. But when they fight any other species, they go to the side to gut and gore. Piranhas will turn their fangs on anything, but they fight one another with flicks of the tail. Rattlesnakes will bite anything, but they wrestle one another. Almost every species has this hardwired resistance to killing its own kind.
When we human beings are overwhelmed with anger and fear, we slam head-on into that midbrain resistance that generally prevents us from killing. Only sociopaths--who by definition don't have that resistance--lack this innate violence immune system.
Throughout human history, when humans fight each other, there is a lot of posturing. Adversaries make loud noises and puff themselves up, trying to daunt the enemy. There is a lot of fleeing and submission. Ancient battles were nothing more than great shoving matches. It was not until one side turned and ran that most of the killing happened, and most of that was stabbing people in the back. All of the ancient military historians report that the vast majority of killing happened in pursuit when one side was fleeing.
In more modern times, the average firing rate was incredibly low in Civil War battles. Paddy Griffith demonstrates that the killing potential of the average Civil War regiment was anywhere from five hundred to a thousand men per minute. The actual killing rate was only one or two men per minute per regiment (The Battle Tactics of the American Civil War). At the Battle of Gettysburg, of the 27,000 muskets picked up from the dead and dying after the battle, 90 percent were loaded. This is an anomaly, because it took 95 percent of their time to load muskets and only 5 percent to fire. But even more amazing, of the thousands of loaded muskets, over half had multiple loads in the barrel--one with 23 loads in the barrel. In reality, the average man would load his musket and bring it to his shoulder, but he could not bring himself to kill. He would be brave, he would stand shoulder to shoulder, he would do what he was trained to do; but at the moment of truth, he could not bring himself to pull the trigger. So, he lowered the weapon and loaded it again. Of those who did fire, only a tiny percentage fired to hit. The vast majority fired over the enemy's head.
During World War II, US Army Brig. Gen. S. L. A. Marshall had a team of researchers study what soldiers did in battle. For the first time in history, they asked individual soldiers what they did in battle. They discovered that only 15 to 20 percent of the individual riflemen could bring themselves to fire at an exposed enemy soldier.
That is the reality of the battlefield. Only a small percentage of soldiers are able and willing to participate. Men are willing to die; they are willing to sacrifice themselves for their nation, but they are not willing to kill. It is a phenomenal insight into human nature, but when the military became aware of that, they systematically went about the process of trying to fix this "problem." From the military perspective, a 15 percent firing rate among riflemen is like a 15 percent literacy rate among librarians. And fix it the military did. By the Korean War, around 55 percent of the soldiers were willing to fire to kill. And by Vietnam, the rate rose to over 90 percent.
 

The Methods in this Madness: Desensitization
How the military increases the killing rate of soldiers in combat is instructive, because our culture today is doing the same thing to our children. The training methods militaries use are brutalization, classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and role modeling. I will explain these in the military context and show how these same factors are contributing to the phenomenal increase of violence in our culture.
Brutalization and desensitization are what happen at boot camp. From the moment you step off the bus you are physically and verbally abused: countless pushups, endless hours at attention or running with heavy loads, while carefully trained professionals take turns screaming at you. Your head is shaved, you are herded together naked and dressed alike, losing all individuality. This brutalization is designed to break down your existing mores and norms, and to accept a new set of values that embrace destruction, violence, and death as a way of life. In the end, you are desensitized to violence and accept it as a normal and essential survival skill in your brutal new world.
Something very similar to this desensitization toward violence is happening to our children through violence in the media, but instead of 18-year-olds, it begins at the age of 18 months when a child is first able to discern what is happening on television. At that age, a child can watch something happening on television and mimic that action. But it isn't until children are six or seven years old that the part of the brain kicks in that lets them understand where information comes from. Even though young children have some understanding of what it means to pretend, they are developmentally unable to distinguish clearly between fantasy and reality.
When young children see somebody shot, stabbed, raped, brutalized, degraded, or murdered on TV, to them it is as though it were actually happening. To have a child of three, four, or five watch a "splatter" movie, learning to relate to a character for the first 90 minutes and then in the last 30 minutes watch helplessly as that new friend is hunted and brutally murdered is the moral and psychological equivalent of introducing your child to a friend, letting her play with that friend, and then butchering that friend in front of your child's eyes. And this happens to our children hundreds upon hundreds of times.
Sure, they are told: "Hey, it's all for fun. Look, this isn't real, it's just TV." And they nod their little heads and say, "okay." But they can't tell the difference. Can you remember a point in your life or in your children's lives when dreams, reality, and television were all jumbled together? That's what it is like at that level of psychological development. That's what the media is doing to them.
The Journal of the American Medical Association published the definitive epidemiological study on the impact of TV violence. The research demonstrated what happened in numerous nations after television made its appearance as compared to nations and regions without TV. The two nations or regions being compared are demographically and ethnically identical; only one variable is different: the presence of television. In every nation, region, or city with television, there is an immediate explosion of violence on the playground, and within 15 years there is a doubling of the murder rate. Why 15 years? That is how long it takes for the brutalization of a three to five-year-old to reach the "prime crime age." That is how long it takes for you to reap what you have sown when you brutalize and desensitize a three-year-old.
Today the data linking violence in the media to violence in society are superior to those linking cancer and tobacco. Hundreds of sound scientific studies demonstrate the social impact of brutalization by the media. The Journal of the American Medical Association concluded that "the introduction of television in the 1950's caused a subsequent doubling of the homicide rate, i.e., long-term childhood exposure to television is a causal factor behind approximately one half of the homicides committed in the United States, or approximately 10,000 homicides annually." The article went on to say that "...if, hypothetically, television technology had never been developed, there would today be 10,000 fewer homicides each year in the United States, 70,000 fewer rapes, and 700,000 fewer injurious assaults" (June 10, 1992).
 
Classical Conditioning
Classical conditioning is like the famous case of Pavlov's dogs you learned about in Psychology 101: The dogs learned to associate the ringing of the bell with food, and, once conditioned, the dogs could not hear the bell without salivating.
The Japanese were masters at using classical conditioning with their soldiers. Early in World War II, Chinese prisoners were placed in a ditch on their knees with their hands bound behind them. And one by one, a select few Japanese soldiers would go into the ditch and bayonet "their" prisoner to death. This is a horrific way to kill another human being. Up on the bank, countless other young soldiers would cheer them on in their violence. Comparatively few soldiers actually killed in these situations, but by making the others watch and cheer, the Japanese were able to use these kinds of atrocities to classically condition a very large audience to associate pleasure with human death and suffering. Immediately afterwards, the soldiers who had been spectators were treated to sake, the best meal they had had in months, and so-called comfort girls. The result? They learned to associate committing violent acts with pleasure.
The Japanese found these kinds of techniques to be extraordinarily effective at quickly enabling very large numbers of soldiers to commit atrocities in the years to come. Operant conditioning (which we will look at shortly) teaches you to kill, but classical conditioning is a subtle but powerful mechanism that teaches you to like it.
This technique is so morally reprehensible that there are very few examples of it in modern US military training, but there are some clear-cut examples of it being done by the media to our children. What is happening to our children is the reverse of the aversion therapy portrayed in the movie A Clockwork Orange. In A Clockwork Orange, a brutal sociopath, a mass murderer, is strapped to a chair and forced to watch violent movies while he is injected with a drug that nauseates him. So he sits and gags and retches as he watches the movies. After hundreds of repetitions of this, he associates violence with nausea, and it limits his ability to be violent.
Every time a child plays an interactive video game, he is learning the exact same conditioned reflex skills as a soldier or police officer in training.
We are doing the exact opposite: Our children watch vivid pictures of human suffering and death, learning to associate it with their favorite soft drink and candy bar or their girlfriend's perfume.
After the Jonesboro shootings, one of the high-school teachers told me how her students reacted when she told them about the shootings at the middle school. "They laughed," she told me with dismay. A similar reaction happens all the time in movie theaters when there is bloody violence. The young people laugh and cheer and keep right on eating popcorn and drinking pop. We have raised a generation of barbarians who have learned to associate violence with pleasure, like the Romans cheering and snacking as the Christians were slaughtered in the Coliseum.
The result is a phenomenon that functions much like AIDS, which I call AVIDS--Acquired Violence Immune Deficiency Syndrome. AIDS has never killed anybody. It destroys your immune system, and then other diseases that shouldn't kill you become fatal. Television violence by itself does not kill you. It destroys your violence immune system and conditions you to derive pleasure from violence. And once you are at close range with another human being, and it's time for you to pull that trigger, Acquired Violence Immune Deficiency Syndrome can destroy your midbrain resistance.
 
Operant Conditioning
The third method the military uses is operant conditioning, a very powerful procedure of stimulus-response, stimulus-response. A benign example is the use of flight simulators to train pilots. An airline pilot in training sits in front of a flight simulator for endless hours; when a particular warning light goes on, he is taught to react in a certain way. When another warning light goes on, a different reaction is required. Stimulus-response, stimulus-response, stimulus-response. One day the pilot is actually flying a jumbo jet; the plane is going down, and 300 people are screaming behind him. He is wetting his seat cushion, and he is scared out of his wits; but he does the right thing. Why? Because he has been conditioned to respond reflexively to this particular crisis.
When people are frightened or angry, they will do what they have been conditioned to do. In fire drills, children learn to file out of the school in orderly fashion. One day there is a real fire, and they are frightened out of their wits; but they do exactly what they have been conditioned to do, and it saves their lives.
The military and law enforcement community have made killing a conditioned response. This has substantially raised the firing rate on the modern battlefield. Whereas infantry training in World War II used bull's-eye targets, now soldiers learn to fire at realistic, man-shaped silhouettes that pop into their field of view. That is the stimulus. The trainees have only a split second to engage the target. The conditioned response is to shoot the target, and then it drops. Stimulus-response, stimulus-response, stimulus-response: soldiers or police officers experience hundreds of repetitions. Later, when soldiers are on the battlefield or a police officer is walking a beat and somebody pops up with a gun, they will shoot reflexively and shoot to kill. We know that 75 to 80 percent of the shooting on the modern battlefield is the result of this kind of stimulus-response training.
Now, if you're a little troubled by that, how much more should we be troubled by the fact that every time a child plays an interactive point-and-shoot video game, he is learning the exact same conditioned reflex and motor skills.
I was an expert witness in a murder case in South Carolina offering mitigation for a kid who was facing the death penalty. I tried to explain to the jury that interactive video games had conditioned him to shoot a gun to kill. He had spent hundreds of dollars on video games learning to point and shoot, point and shoot. One day he and his buddy decided it would be fun to rob the local convenience store. They walked in, and he pointed a snub-nosed .38 pistol at the clerk's head. The clerk turned to look at him, and the defendant shot reflexively from about six feet. The bullet hit the clerk right between the eyes--which is a pretty remarkable shot with that weapon at that range--and killed this father of two. Afterward, we asked the boy what happened and why he did it. It clearly was not part of the plan to kill the guy--it was being videotaped from six different directions. He said, "I don't know. It was a mistake. It wasn't supposed to happen."
In the military and law enforcement worlds, the right option is often not to shoot. But you never, never put your quarter in that video machine with the intention of not shooting. There is always some stimulus that sets you off. And when he was excited, and his heart rate went up, and vasoconstriction closed his forebrain down, this young man did exactly what he was conditioned to do: he reflexively pulled the trigger, shooting accurately just like all those times he played video games.
This process is extraordinarily powerful and frightening. The result is ever more homemade pseudo-sociopaths who kill reflexively and show no remorse. Our children are learning to kill and learning to like it; and then we have the audacity to say, "Oh my goodness, what's wrong?"
One of the boys allegedly involved in the Jonesboro shootings (and they are just boys) had a fair amount of experience shooting real guns. The other one was a nonshooter and, to the best of our knowledge, had almost no experience shooting. Between them, those two boys fired 27 shots from a range of over 100 yards, and they hit 15 people. That's pretty remarkable shooting. We run into these situations often--kids who have never picked up a gun in their lives pick up a real gun and are incredibly accurate. Why?
 
Role Models
In the military, you are immediately confronted with a role model: your drill sergeant. He personifies violence and aggression. Along with military heroes, these violent role models have always been used to influence young, impressionable minds.
Today the media are providing our children with role models. This can be seen not just in the lawless sociopaths in movies and TV shows but in the media-inspired, copycat aspects of the Jonesboro murders. This is the part of these juvenile crimes that the TV networks would much rather not talk about.
Research in the 1970s demonstrated the existence of "cluster suicides" in which the local TV reporting of teen suicides directly caused numerous copycat suicides of impressionable teenagers. Somewhere in every population there are potentially suicidal kids who will say to themselves, "Well, I'll show all those people who have been mean to me. I know how to get my picture on TV, too." Because of this research, television stations today generally do not cover suicides. But when the pictures of teenage killers appear on TV, the effect is the same: Somewhere there is a potentially violent little boy who says to himself, "Well, I'll show all those people who have been mean to me. I know how to get my picture on TV too."
Thus we get copycat, cluster murders that work their way across America like a virus spread by the six o'clock news. No matter what someone has done, if you put his picture on TV, you have made him a celebrity, and someone, somewhere, will emulate him.
The lineage of the Jonesboro shootings began at Pearl, Mississippi, fewer than six months before. In Pearl, a 16-year-old boy was accused of killing his mother and then going to his school and shooting nine students, two of whom died, including his ex-girlfriend. Two months later, this virus spread to Paducah, Kentucky, where a 14-year-old boy was arrested for killing three students and wounding five others.
A very important step in the spread of this copycat crime virus occurred in Stamps, Arkansas, 15 days after Pearl and just a little over 90 days before Jonesboro. In Stamps, a 14-year-old boy, who was angry at his schoolmates, hid in the woods and fired at children as they came out of school. Sound familiar? Only two children were injured in this crime, so most of the world didn't hear about it; but it got great regional coverage on TV, and two little boys in Jonesboro, Arkansas, probably did hear about it.
And then there was Springfield, Oregon, and so many others. Is this a reasonable price to pay for the TV networks' "right" to turn juvenile defendants into celebrities and role models by playing up their pictures on TV?
Our society needs to be informed about these crimes, but when the images of the young killers are broadcast on television, they become role models. The average preschooler in America watches 27 hours of television a week. The average child gets more one-on-one communication from TV than from all her parents and teachers combined. The ultimate achievement for our children is to get their picture on TV. The solution is simple, and it comes straight out of the suicidology literature: The media have every right and responsibility to tell the story, but they have no right to glorify the killers by presenting their images on TV.
Reality Check: Sixty percent of men on TV are involved in violence; 11 percent are killers. Unlike actual rates, in the media the majority of homicide victims are women (Gerbner 1994). In a Canadian town in which TV was first introduced in 1973, a 160 percent increase in aggression, hitting, shoving, and biting was documented in first and second-grade students after exposure, with no change in behavior in children in two control communities (Centerwall 1992). Fifteen years after the introduction of TV, homicides, rapes, and assaults doubled in the United States (American Medical Association). Twenty percent of suburban high schoolers endorse shooting someone "who has stolen something from you" (Toch and Silver 1993). In the United States, approximately two million teenagers carry knives, guns, clubs, or razors. As many as 135,000 take them to school (America by the Numbers). Americans spend over $100 million on toy guns every year (What Counts: The Complete Harper's Index © 1991).

Unlearning Violence
What is the road home from the dark and lonely place to which we have traveled? One route infringes on civil liberties. The city of New York has made remarkable progress in recent years in bringing down crime rates, but they may have done so at the expense of some civil liberties. People who are fearful say that is a price they are willing to pay.
Another route would be to "just turn it off;" if you don't like what is on television, use the "off" button. Yet, if all the parents of the 15 shooting victims in Jonesboro had protected their children from TV violence, it wouldn't have done a bit of good. Because somewhere there were two little boys whose parents didn't "just turn it off."
On the night of the Jonesboro shootings, clergy and counselors were working in small groups in the hospital waiting room, comforting the groups of relatives and friends of the victims. Then they noticed one woman sitting alone silently.
A counselor went over to the woman and discovered that she was the mother of one of the girls who had been killed. She had no friends, no husband, no family with her as she sat in the hospital, stunned by her loss. "I just came to find out how to get my little girl's body back," she said. But the body had been taken to Little Rock, 100 miles away, for an autopsy. Her very next concern was, "I just don't know how I'm going to pay for the funeral. I don't know how I can afford it." That little girl was truly all she had in all the world. Come to Jonesboro, friend, and tell this mother she should "just turn it off."

Ten Nonviolent Video Games
The following list of nonviolent video games has been developed by The Games Project (in 1999). These games are ranked high for their social and play value and technical merit:
  • Bust a Move
  • Tetris
  • Theme Park
  • Absolute Pinball
  • Myst
  • NASCAR
  • SimCity
  • The Incredible Machine
  • Front Page Sports: Golf
  • Earthworm Jim

Fighting Back
We need to make progress in the fight against child abuse, racism, and poverty, and in rebuilding our families. No one is denying that the breakdown of the family is a factor. But nations without our divorce rates are also having increases in violence. Besides, research demonstrates that one major source of harm associated with single-parent families occurs when the TV becomes both the nanny and the second parent. Work is needed in all these areas, but there is a new front--taking on the producers and purveyors of media violence. Simply put, we ought to work toward legislation that outlaws violent video games for children. There is no constitutional right for a child to play an interactive video game that teaches him weapons-handling skills or that simulates destruction of God's creatures.
The day may also be coming when we are able to seat juries in America who are willing to sock it to the networks in the only place they really understand--their wallets. After the Jonesboro shootings, Time magazine said: "As for media violence, the debate there is fast approaching the same point that discussions about the health impact of tobacco reached some time ago--it's over. Few researchers bother any longer to dispute that bloodshed on TV and in the movies has an effect on kids who witness it" (April 6, 1998).
Most of all, the American people need to learn the lesson of Jonesboro: Violence is not a game; it's not fun, it's not something that we do for entertainment. Violence kills.
Every parent in America desperately needs to be warned of the impact of TV and other violent media on children, just as we would warn them of some widespread carcinogen. The problem is that the TV networks, which use the public airwaves we have licensed to them, are our key means of public education in America. And they are stonewalling.
In the days after the Jonesboro shootings, I was interviewed on Canadian national TV, the British Broadcasting Company, and many U.S. and international radio shows and newspapers. But the American television networks simply would not touch this aspect of the story. Never in my experience as a historian and a psychologist have I seen any institution in America so clearly responsible for so very many deaths, and so clearly abusing their publicly licensed authority and power to cover up their guilt.
Time after time, idealistic young network producers contacted me from one of the networks, fascinated by the irony that an expert in the field of violence and aggression was living in Jonesboro and was at the school almost from the beginning. But unlike all the other media, these network news stories always died a sudden, silent death when the network's powers-that-be said, "Yeah, we need this story like we need a hole in the head."
Many times since the shooting I have been asked, "Why weren't you on TV talking about the stuff in your book?" And every time my answer had to be, "The TV networks are burying this story. They know they are guilty, and they want to delay the retribution as long as they can."
As an author and expert on killing, I believe I have spoken on the subject at every Rotary, Kiwanis, and Lions Club in a 50-mile radius of Jonesboro. So when the plague of satellite dishes descended upon us like huge locusts, many people here were aware of the scientific data linking TV violence and violent crime.
The networks will stick their lenses anywhere and courageously expose anything. Like flies on open wounds, they find nothing too private or shameful for their probing lenses--except themselves and their share of guilt in the terrible, tragic crime that happened here.
A CBS executive told me his plan. He knows all about the link between media and violence. His own in-house people have advised him to protect his child from the poison his industry is bringing to America's children. He is not going to expose his child to TV until she's old enough to learn how to read. And then he will select very carefully what she sees. He and his wife plan to send her to a daycare center that has no television, and he plans to show her only age-appropriate videos.
That should be the bare minimum with children: Show them only age-appropriate videos, and think hard about what is age-appropriate. The most benign product you are going to get from the networks are 22-minute sitcoms or cartoons providing instant solutions for all of life's problems, interlaced with commercials telling you what a slug you are if you don't ingest the right sugary substances and don't wear the right shoes.
The worst product your child is going to get from the networks is represented by one TV commentator who told me, "Well, we only have one really violent show on our network, and that is NYPD Blue. I'll admit that that is bad, but it is only one night a week."
I wondered at the time how she would feel if someone said, "Well, I only beat my wife in front of the kids one night a week." The effect is the same.
"You're not supposed to know who I am!" said NYPD Blue star Kim Delaney, in response to young children who recognized her from her role on that show. According to USA Weekend, she was shocked that underage viewers watch her show, which is rated TV-14 for gruesome crimes, raw language, and explicit sex scenes. But they do watch, don't they?
Education about media and violence does make a difference. I was on a radio call-in show in San Antonio, Texas. A woman called and said, "I would never have had the courage to do this two years ago. But let me tell you what happened. You tell me if I was right.
"My 13-year-old boy spent the night with a neighbor boy. After that night, he started having nightmares. I got him to admit what the nightmares were about. While he was at the neighbor's house, they watched splatter movies all night: people cutting people up with chainsaws and stuff like that.
"I called the neighbors and told them, 'Listen: you are sick people. I wouldn't feel any different about you if you had given my son pornography or alcohol. And I'm not going to have anything further to do with you or your son--and neither is anybody else in this neighborhood, if I have anything to do with it--until you stop what you're doing.' "
That's powerful. That's censure, not censorship. We ought to have the moral courage to censure people who think that violence is legitimate entertainment.
One of the most effective ways for Christians to be salt and light is by simply confronting the culture of violence as entertainment. A friend of mine, a retired army officer who teaches at a nearby middle school, uses the movie Gettysburg to teach his students about the Civil War. A scene in that movie very dramatically depicts the tragedy of Pickett's Charge. As the Confederate troops charge into the Union lines, the cannons fire into their masses at point-blank range, and there is nothing but a red mist that comes up from the smoke and flames. He told me that when he first showed this heart-wrenching, tragic scene to his students, they laughed.
He began to confront this behavior ahead of time by saying: "In the past, students have laughed at this scene, and I want to tell you that this is completely unacceptable behavior. This movie depicts a tragedy in American history, a tragedy that happened to our ancestors, and I will not tolerate any laughing." From then on, when he played that scene to his students, over the years, he says there was no laughter. Instead, many of them wept.
What the media teach is unnatural, and if confronted in love and assurance, the house they have built on the sand will crumble. But our house is built on the rock. If we don't actively present our values, then the media will most assuredly inflict theirs on our children, and the children, like those in that class watching Gettysburg, simply won't know any better.
There are many other things that the Christian community can do to help change our culture. Youth activities can provide alternatives to television, and churches can lead the way in providing alternative locations for latchkey children. Fellowship groups can provide guidance and support to young parents as they strive to raise their children without the destructive influences of the media. Mentoring programs can pair mature, educated adults with young parents, helping them through their child's preschool years without using the TV as a baby-sitter. And most of all, the churches can provide the clarion call of decency and love and peace as an alternative to death and destruction--not just for the sake of the church, but for the transformation of our culture.