I was going to post an OP in GD about this (minus the gun part), but I may as well float it here.
This article, and to a greater extent the more media exposure to crime and criminality in general, has exposed a fundamental rift in what one could call "moral values" in the up and coming generations of both young adults and children. Whereas morality as a social contract was previously held in a dominant status through the pressure of peers and perception of social adequacy, a significant number of the upcoming generations are showing to have morals more in tune to their social interactions today, namely expression through anonymity of the internet or through other impersonal communications methods (Texting, social media, et cetera.) Thanks due in no small part to technological advances, people are finding it increasingly possible to communicate largely through the internet, almost exclusively behind the veil of anonymity and all of the benefits and perils that it contains.
In years past, one would be hard-pressed to call another human being a vicious name to their face or hurl baseless accusations, as such an act would normally be responded to with social stigma and ostracization. Given the inability of society at large to respond to anonymous threats, acts or statements, the internet is proving a tool and an outlet for thoughts or emotions that would otherwise remain unsaid for the sake of civility. However, with the advent and expansion of the internet community, anonymity is a weapon in and of itself; This, it seems, is being replicated in society's interactions with one another, face to face.
Slut-shaming, outright threats, insults, slurs, bullying and slander are facts and, debatably, outright staples to the internet community consisting of younger generations. Recently, these incidents are starting to come to the light for society as a whole, but this is far from a new behavior and it is indicative of a much larger systematic breakdown of the social graces normally considered sacrosanct. Just as internet anonymity has become part and parcel of the online experience, so too have evolved the defenses against such acts, resulting in an "Eye for an eye" sentiment and an escalation of hostilities. So long as this attitude is confined to the online realm, such acts are, while morally stunted, acceptable and expected. The problem manifests as such only if said attitude is carried outside the digitized confines of the web, and the repercussions of this attitude are minimal, even in the real world, as such actions are rarely frowned upon. With the majority of America online, and with each new generation growing more and more integrated into the social structure of the Internet -before- that of real life, discourtesy and, to a lesser extent, retribution are becoming the normal response to perceived slights or aggravations.
This is only a small part of the problem. Americans as a whole are upset, disgruntled, discouraged and in some cases outright angry for perceived entitlements or desires and only go further in perpetuating the "retribution is normal" social status in passing their troubles onto their children. In addition to providing a downward spiral of social grace, the combination of the online community and, to a lesser extent, disgruntled parents is resulting in a casual, almost sociopathic disregard for the social contract and all that it entails. With the digital community expanding rapidly and more and more people are wired to the internet, the trend of "Retribution", online or off, may very well become the social norm. The potential effects on society at large remain to be seen or proven, but should be observed carefully and with a wary eye.
Input would be lovely, and I'll likely crosspost, but given your article, and my brief thoughts here, what do you think, BB (and others)?
= new reply since forum marked as read