Re: responsibility?

["Vincent A King/KINGVA/CC01/INEEL/US" <KINGVA@INEL.GOV>]

When extreme actions by an individual "cross the line" into the realm of

the illegal and inhumane, I think the "group" has an obligation to condemn

the action as wrong and make it clear such actions are not acceptable.  If

the group says nothing, public perception is that they implicitly condone

the extremist activities.



And to go a step further, if the group provides aid of any kind (financial

or otherwise) to individuals performing such acts, then they are indeed

supporting that type activity and share the guilt.



(In light of the above, I have not detected PETA condemning or distancing

itself from extremist individuals.  I would suggest that PETA's

communications coordinator make PETA's views on such activities abundantly

clear to the public.  As far as the extremists, I am not interested in the

message of anyone who injures or destroys to try to get their "message"

across.)



Vincent King,

Idaho Falls









Many "groups" - antinuclear, pro-life,

pro-animal rights, militaristic and white supremacist, pro-Palestinian

rights, etc. - may or may not be responsible for some violent or illegal

actions of their members. If the group whips people up into a fervor and

says "we must act!", and some members take that to mean "I should do

anything necessary to bring about change, including hurting someone", is

the

"group" ultimately responsible? Were they speaking responsibly and some

individuals acted wrongly, or were they playing shadow games and trying to

dodge the consequences? Tough question in all cases.



Mike















************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/