Counterirritant to Aurora theater tragedy
- Thread starter TerzaRima
- Start date
First of all, I hate that they took their young children to see the movie anyway. Not because I think an infant would watch (though the 4-year old could if she hadn't been sleeping). But...when you have young children, you make sacrifices. If you can't get a sitter, you don't go out to something like that. You don't take an infant and a young child to a loud movie theater in the middle of the night.
Hell, you don't take an infant to a movie theater under any circumstances.
But then on top of that, the dude thought of only himself. Gross. Why in the world did he put the baby boy down? I don't get it.
YOU'RE THE ONE WHO PUT HIM DOWN!
OMG, the more I think of this, the more upset I get. Not only should he have never put the baby down, he should have grabbed his daughter. A grown man can carry a baby and a 4-year old together. And he should have helped his wife get out as well. I realize it was a scary situation, but at the very least, WHAT THE FUCK was he doing putting the baby down?
Hell, you don't take an infant to a movie theater under any circumstances.
But then on top of that, the dude thought of only himself. Gross. Why in the world did he put the baby boy down? I don't get it.
YOU'RE THE ONE WHO PUT HIM DOWN!
OMG, the more I think of this, the more upset I get. Not only should he have never put the baby down, he should have grabbed his daughter. A grown man can carry a baby and a 4-year old together. And he should have helped his wife get out as well. I realize it was a scary situation, but at the very least, WHAT THE FUCK was he doing putting the baby down?
I'm not at all certain how I would react in a situation like that. Therefore, I don't presume to judge what others should have done.
I get it, which is why I would understand if he didn't grab his daughter/wife, but why would you put the baby down?
I don't have any idea. People react differently to emergency situations and logical reasoning is seldom part of the process.
Some people are better in intense situations than others. My husband said he worries that he would have acted like this guy. If something completely comes out of left field at him, he's shocked into stupidity (his words, not mine) and generally does the wrong thing. He's just not wired for intensity. I'm guessing this guy isn't either. Doesn't mean he's an asshole. It just means he sucks in emergency situations.
I've read several stories of people protecting others during the attack. One story reported three boyfriends taking bullets for their girlfriends after they covered the girls' bodies with their own. Arguably the most vulnerable potential victim in the theatre, a four month old, was left by his father to die. His own fiancee put herself in front of the four year old.
It's never happened to me, but I just can't wrap my head around that reaction. Strangers take bullets, or get hit by cars for kids. This guy wasn't willing to do it for his own son.
It's never happened to me, but I just can't wrap my head around that reaction. Strangers take bullets, or get hit by cars for kids. This guy wasn't willing to do it for his own son.
He was quoted in the interview as being worried that the baby's crying would attract the shooter's attention. Fend for yourself, Junior.
Can you at least judge that the guy doesn't seem to have the brains to be ashamed of this interlude and is taking this opportunity to grief whore all over network TV? So much distaste, so little time.
Can you at least judge that the guy doesn't seem to have the brains to be ashamed of this interlude and is taking this opportunity to grief whore all over network TV? So much distaste, so little time.
Another interesting bit; his fiancee called him, and he "drove back to the theatre."
I kind of, sort of, get his initial reaction of, as Kaylemay put it, being shocked into stupidity. Having enough time to run from the theatre, though, and then driving away? That's adds another element of self-preservation that reaches into uncomfortable territory.
I kind of, sort of, get his initial reaction of, as Kaylemay put it, being shocked into stupidity. Having enough time to run from the theatre, though, and then driving away? That's adds another element of self-preservation that reaches into uncomfortable territory.
That's exactly how I feel. He already had the baby in his arms. Don't you think he'd hug him closer and jet out of there? I just don't understand what he could have been thinking when he put the baby down other than something like, "If I don't have the weight of this baby in my arms, I can run faster and get myself out of here."
I get that he probably wasn't thinking that consciously, but...I don't get why his only thought wasn't, "I have to get him out of here! I have to protect him!"
I know those would be my only thoughts. I may not do the thing that ultimately saves us. I may run when I should hide or hide when I should run, but I KNOW my body would be covering my child, and his/her safety would be my only thought. I know that. The same way when I have to slam on my breaks in the car, my arm goes out to keep my daughter from leaning forward. The same way I naturally walk on the outside of the sidewalk closer to the cars. The same way I ran out into the middle of a busy street without even looking at the cars coming our way to grab my daughter when she'd wondered out there without looking first.
He sounded a bit ashamed to me.
He panicked. Some people will do that with much less of a threat.
He panicked. Some people will do that with much less of a threat.
Some people are just natural born cowards I guess.
Hopefully the girl will now look for a better partner, one who she can count on in times of trouble.
Hopefully the girl will now look for a better partner, one who she can count on in times of trouble.
Uh. . . what? Do you have any idea about surviving a battlefield? You keep quiet and play dead until the bullets stop flying. Having a/your baby cry is the last thing you want because it draws attention to the baby and yourself.
Panic and shock can also make one act irrationally.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2011
- Messages
- 3,262
- Reaction score
- 3,238
I've just spent three days cramming on CERT training (for new WIP), including reading loads on the psychology of disaster. Roger is right--you really can't make judgments from the outside about his intelligence, his fitness as a parent, his courage, his...well, anything. People react weirdly to impossible situations. We all like to think we'd be heroic, yada yada, but...maybe not. (Like everybody thinks they wouldn't have shocked in the guy in Milgram's experiments, but 95% of people do, and have, in the similar experiments after that one.)
I sure hope I'd be one to crawl low and stay the heck out of the way when some evil man started shooting. But my experience in earthquakes suggests to me I do stupid things based on recent experiences and odd priorities rather than what I "know to be best."
I feel bad for all of them there, this guy included. I'd rather be me than him.
And I also know now that judging them and blaming them is also part of the broader/public PTSD-ish response. Blaming cops is up there, high on the list of irrational judgments we make, too. Blame the shooter's mother. Blame the phase of the moon. Blame South Park. Scattershot, irrational blame: it's how we try and control a world that cannot be controlled.
I sure hope I'd be one to crawl low and stay the heck out of the way when some evil man started shooting. But my experience in earthquakes suggests to me I do stupid things based on recent experiences and odd priorities rather than what I "know to be best."
I feel bad for all of them there, this guy included. I'd rather be me than him.
And I also know now that judging them and blaming them is also part of the broader/public PTSD-ish response. Blaming cops is up there, high on the list of irrational judgments we make, too. Blame the shooter's mother. Blame the phase of the moon. Blame South Park. Scattershot, irrational blame: it's how we try and control a world that cannot be controlled.
Well, from what I've read, he isn't trained for battle, number one. Number two, it's his son! Not another soldier. He left a crying baby to fend for itself...that's highly different from running from a screaming, dying man on a battlefield.
Wait, what? Dying people around you. Shock, horror, panic.
This story doesn't make him a hero, but it doesn't make him a coward. I'm not buying it.
Yorkist
Banned
Perhaps because in a situation where bullets and shrapnel are flying, the ground = likely the safest place to be?
Would they be, like... human shields then?
I can't pretend to know what I'd do in such a chaotic, confusing situation (with, ah, tear gas), but if I were being all logical at the time and had access to my limited knowledge of ballistics, "down" is the precise direction I'd tend to favor.
ETA: Also, the reason that the guy forgot his infant is probably that he was shell-shocked.
Respectfully, I disagree. Part of military training is to do things, in battle, that go against your natural instincts. Protecting a dying friend/child/soldier is often instinctual, but not a great battlefield survival tactic. If there is a screaming child, at risk of death, I think most people would sacrifice their own safety to help that child.This is my opinion, BTW.We're all just speculating. That being said, there are already countless stories from this tragedy about people protecting complete strangers.
Didn't think about that. I guess that could have been his thinking.
You're probably right. I just...initially...I saw red. I don't know why. I just couldn't understand it and still can't. But then, when I was much younger I thought I wouldn't hesitate to report a rape if I were raped. I didn't. I used to be prolife...until I considered the multiple situations that, were I in them, I realized I didn't know whether I'd keep the baby or not.
Maybe I should have stepped back a bit before posting. I still don't get it, but you're right that I should judge.
Yes, and that makes them heroes. We're not talking about a hero. On the other hand, we are not talking about a coward either despite the fact that we want to paint them as so. The man is describing chaos and not knowing what to do. He has never planned on such an event happening. He has never considered such an event as possible. We shouldn't expect him to plan on such an event happening. We shouldn't expect him to consider such an event as possible.
Would depend on which direction one was running, no? Toward an assailant, or away from an assailant?
The fact is, we can sit here and contemplate actions and decide which is the best, safest and most heroic course to take because we aren't in any danger. This guy didn't have that luxury. Fight or flight kicked in. He flew. So, he isn't a hero. A lot of people aren't.
I agree we're certainly not talking about a hero. I think maybe I misinterpreted your original comments. Your original analogy, in my mind, compared him to a soldier on the battlefield. Now I understand what you actually meant. You were comparing it more to the chaos of the battlefield, right?
Well, regardless. Obviously he didn't plan on that specific event happening, but I think most parents have some sort of plan in their minds of how to react when their child is in danger.
Again, this is all speculative, and I wasn't there, so I don't know how I'd react, but his actions could have caused the life of his own child.
I could understand that if he wasn't holding his helpless baby boy in his arms. I could even understand fleeing and not helping your girlfriend. But I really can't wrap my mind around the fact that he had the baby in his arms. He didn't even have to do anything different except keep him with him. Don't let go. You want to flee, flee. But you're already holding your son. Why take the time to stop and put him down, unless as Yorkist suggested, you think that by placing him on the ground, his life is more likely to be saved.