The New York Daily News cover on Va. shootings

Whether or not the New York cover was proper or not (it wasn't), the editors made sure the gunman won this battle. He wanted extreme publicity for his act and he got it. Whatever happened to proper decency, in this case fellow human beings saying, "Fuck you gunman. You aren't winning in New York? We're not running your picture or any pictures of your COWARDLY act.'"

 

To the extent you do so to prevent copycat acts, I agree. Otherwise, who cares? He's not some child we're trying to teach a lesson to. Newspapers have a duty to their readers. They can't let some made-up pissing match with a loony toon gunman trump that. Who cares what he does or doesn't want? We're above that.

 

Newspapers have a "duty" to readers? I'd start by not ripping them off with the embarassingly small editions/awful coverage of 2015 compared to 20 years ago. But I digress ...
We're still doing our duty if we don't run the asshole gunman's picture and don't run his life story. Tell the story of the murders, but you don't need to do it in a totally exploitative way. That cover was done to shock and a desperate attempt to sell copies. How bout selling some ads instead and put out a responsible cover. Thank u.

 

Who gives a shit what he wants? He's dead. And this crazy son of a bitch was going to commit this act no matter what, it would seem.

 

I'm not sure what experts say what, was just pointing out some statistics. Some other statistics are that in NJ and NY magazines are limited to 15 rounds or less. In NJ it is almost impossible for anyone other than law enforcement officers to get a permit to carry. Don't have the stats and the media also never mentions it, but would bet that a large majority of the crimes committed with guns in NJ are with unregistered guns.

 

So, where do you stand on newspapers putting photos of two planes crashing into the world trade center? That was the front page of every paper on Sept. 12, 2001. Frankly, I don't see a difference.

I think most of us agree that plastering the photos on the front page may have been in bad taste. But there's not a paper worth a lick that would alter its agenda for the sake of spite.

 

There's also a theory (put forth by the Freakanomics guys) that the legalization of abortion in 1973 led to fewer unwanted children, who would have become late-teenage, potential violent criminals by the late 80s & early 90s.