Pro tip: If you don't want something to happen, simply make an anonymous threat to either shoot-up or bomb the event and it will be cancelled! It's a little known fact that bowing to terrorists' demands is actually standard operating procedure in the US! I hear next year we're going to start switching out our Grand Union flag (you know the old stars and stripes) for the flag of whatever country is currently sending us the most threads and instead of standing and saying the pledge of allegiance, we're going to kowtow and be quite in the hopes that no one follows through with any of their threats.
[SERIOUS TIME]
But really, why is it that people think that every single threat is credible. If I were actually going to shoot up or bomb a place, I would do it without warning. The only reason I would send an actual threat to someone is if I wanted to prevent them from doing something, in which case I probably would have no intention on following through with the threat. I know that I'm operating on a higher level of thinking than most of the people who actually commit mass-shootings or bombings but it still doesn't make sense. If you wanted to kill people, you would want to minimize the number of survivors and the best way to do that would be to not let anyone know what's going on. It's just intuitive. Look at how people play video games. You don't get many kills if you go stomping around and firing your weapons randomly. Your best course of action is to maintain as much stealth as possible by firing your weapon as few times as possible and attracting the attention of as few enemies as possible.
Standard operating procedure should be to take ZERO threats seriously unless there is actual evidence that an attack is eminent and such evidence is probably never gathered in regards to attacks that are threatened because threats pose no threat.
(This is about Sony as well as many other recent instances of people bowing to the demands of people who threaten them.)
-Ben
No comments:
Post a Comment