Dear editor,

These thoughts are out of mainstream and probably won’t be published but are submitted anyway.

Are guns the only problem or is the quest for fame part of the tragic equation?

Consider someone who’s 64 and has been a “high roller” in the casinos, but is bored with it all and think it’s time to go out — “Not with a whimper, but a bang.” Las Vegas would be good place to create a scene and become famous; good tools would be guns.

In these cases, my tools of choice would be guns which fire and reload with each trigger pull. They would not look like the old time hunting rifles, but angry, mechanical devices, which enhance the macho image I want to portray.

I’d be immediately famous, an international notorious figure; my tools were not only guns, but also the Fourth Estate — the newspapers, TV, radio — the organized press.

In my opinion, the quest for publicity is one contributing factor to the sad sickness now infecting our land and schools and crowded gatherings.

One example is coverage of the tragic shooting at a Florida public school: NBC Nightly News published footage and photos of the predator 12 times the first night and during the following days repeatedly offered his image for public consumption — immediate fame. Earlier, similar media advertisement happened at Las Vegas, and at the South Carolina church and dozens of other tragedies scattered across the country.

I’m as curious as the next. I’d like to know whether the killer was white, black, brown or green — but do I really need to know? Do I really need to know his reasoning, exactly how he planned and followed through with his horrific acts? Do I need to know where he lived and what his neighbors thought of — as well as repeatedly see his photograph and learn of his postings on Facebook?

When or where does the right to know end and the need to know begin; where does the right to know versus concern for the greater good become balanced? Is there a point wherein more information only appeals to morbid curiosity and possibly encourages repetition?

In my opinion, The Fourth Estate should, by legislative action or other means, be prevented from publishing photographs and names of captured or dead terroristic act perpetrators. Those still at large should be advertised, for public disclosure may help with apprehension, but the captured or dead should disappear as disgraced, unknown, sterile dust.

Much of the media will disagree by saying: “The right to know is the oxygen of freedom and, furthermore, the story will be broadcast by social media.”

The rebuttal: The right to know mostly refers to democratic governments and the need of constituents to render judgment, based on knowledge. Second point: Most, especially the older generations, think social media is trash; social media has no validity and represents nothing more than hair salon or breakfast table gossip. You’ve only arrived when your name is published or image shown by the recognized and respected press.

Journalists, show some responsibility towards the greater good by focusing on the victims, their horror and suffering — not on the cause. Perhaps, if you do, someone old or young, who’s considering a similar act might reconsider. He might reconsider if he realizes he’ll remain unadvertised and unknown.

I submit: guns are not the only problem. Advertisement of the twisted, senseless, useless, person and his acts also contribute to the plague.

Walter Stephens

Tifton