Savas Publishing & Consulting Group

Moral Choices in an Immoral World

12/08/02

"All that must be done for evil to flourish in this world is for the good man to remain silent." -- Edmund Burke

A chatty throng of perhaps 20 students gathered promptly at 3:30 p.m. on a brisk autumn day in 1976. A small field near an old bridge in Mason City, Iowa, hosted the event. Two teenage boys were about to square off, throw a few fists, fall back, acknowledge the stinging blows, shake hands grudgingly, and disperse for football practice, work, or home. Few physical encounters deviated from this norm. Rarer still was the serious injury. My nose still smarts when I think about it; Bill's eye might still be black.

The ritualized "dispute" was a right of passage. A generally harmless enterprise. Moms professed genuine shock at the barbaric behavior of their sons; dads feigned anger while reminiscing back to their own personal combats. And life went on.

No longer. At least not at our own Oak Ridge High School. Many already know about now-infamous "attack," but a surprising slice of our community does not.

On Wednesday, November 21, 2002, three young men threatened a schoolmate's mother at her home. The next day in school--in school--they hunted down her son and proceeded to beat Billy Terrie into unconsciousness.

Shocked? You should be. Strap yourself in, because there is much more to this pathetic tale. One of the wolf pack sucker punched Billy from the front while the other two brave lads kicked him in the face and slammed his head into a wall.

While he was unconscious.

This uncivilized performance demonstrates a mens rea--mental state--well beyond the traditional Tom Sawyer fistacuffs I witnessed. Indeed, it manifests an intent to cause great bodily harm--or worse. The three-on-one offensive could easily have left Billy critically injured. He was one sharp kick in the temple away from a coma or death.

But Billy was lucky. He escaped with a concussion, contusions, and a dollop of embarrassment.

Disgusted? You should be. Here is more for you to consider: this savage pack attack was launched while Billy was in the snack line during morning break. The location was not randomly selected. There is a blind spot in the school's security cameras outside the cafeteria--exactly where the ambush took place.

The beating smells like the result of a conspiracy (an agreement between two or more people to commit an unlawful act) between three young men who carefully planned and launched a brutal felonious attack on the grounds of a publicly supported institution where we send our children to school.

Incensed? Appalled? Good. You should be. I think it gets worse. Other students witnessed the assault. Did they run and tell an instructor or adult what was going on and turn in the criminals? Did they jump in and try to defend the prostrate youth? No, and apparently, no. Instead, they watched while the assailants throttled their victim and left. In broad daylight. In front of witnesses who know their names.

This should sicken you further: for days on end the witnesses refused to identify the attackers. The police know the names of the aggressors because the young man who threw the first punch confessed (and is now facing a possible felony charge). But the student onlookers, for a good long while (and many to this very day), balked at the idea of "ratting on their fellow students."

Statistics gathered nationally demonstrate that in similar attacks, the assailants almost always tell other students in advance about their intent. A betting man would wager, then, that other students at Oak Ridge had prior knowledge the attack was coming and did little if anything to intervene.

This troubling inaction poses an interesting question: do our kids possess the ability to morally discriminate between innocuous schoolyard acts (for which remaining mum is perfectly acceptable) and felonious attacks? Why did those who refused to turn in the perpetrators of a vicious crime on their own school grounds, committed before their own eyes, weigh the consequences of silence and then make what is obviously a wrong (and very disturbing) choice? Do they now appreciate how wrong they were to have remained silent? Do they care?

How lucky will the next Billy be?



		Blog Home
	Moral Choices in an Immoral World 12/08/02 "All that must be done for evil to flourish in this world is for the good man to remain silent." -- Edmund Burke A chatty throng of perhaps 20 students gathered promptly at 3:30 p.m. on a brisk autumn day in 1976. A small field near an old bridge in Mason City, Iowa, hosted the event. Two teenage boys were about to square off, throw a few fists, fall back, acknowledge the stinging blows, shake hands grudgingly, and disperse for football practice, work, or home. Few physical encounters deviated from this norm. Rarer still was the serious injury. My nose still smarts when I think about it; Bill's eye might still be black. The ritualized "dispute" was a right of passage. A generally harmless enterprise. Moms professed genuine shock at the barbaric behavior of their sons; dads feigned anger while reminiscing back to their own personal combats. And life went on. No longer. At least not at our own Oak Ridge High School. Many already know about now-infamous "attack," but a surprising slice of our community does not. On Wednesday, November 21, 2002, three young men threatened a schoolmate's mother at her home. The next day in school--in school--they hunted down her son and proceeded to beat Billy Terrie into unconsciousness. Shocked? You should be. Strap yourself in, because there is much more to this pathetic tale. One of the wolf pack sucker punched Billy from the front while the other two brave lads kicked him in the face and slammed his head into a wall. While he was unconscious. This uncivilized performance demonstrates a mens rea--mental state--well beyond the traditional Tom Sawyer fistacuffs I witnessed. Indeed, it manifests an intent to cause great bodily harm--or worse. The three-on-one offensive could easily have left Billy critically injured. He was one sharp kick in the temple away from a coma or death. But Billy was lucky. He escaped with a concussion, contusions, and a dollop of embarrassment. Disgusted? You should be. Here is more for you to consider: this savage pack attack was launched while Billy was in the snack line during morning break. The location was not randomly selected. There is a blind spot in the school's security cameras outside the cafeteria--exactly where the ambush took place. The beating smells like the result of a conspiracy (an agreement between two or more people to commit an unlawful act) between three young men who carefully planned and launched a brutal felonious attack on the grounds of a publicly supported institution where we send our children to school. Incensed? Appalled? Good. You should be. I think it gets worse. Other students witnessed the assault. Did they run and tell an instructor or adult what was going on and turn in the criminals? Did they jump in and try to defend the prostrate youth? No, and apparently, no. Instead, they watched while the assailants throttled their victim and left. In broad daylight. In front of witnesses who know their names. This should sicken you further: for days on end the witnesses refused to identify the attackers. The police know the names of the aggressors because the young man who threw the first punch confessed (and is now facing a possible felony charge). But the student onlookers, for a good long while (and many to this very day), balked at the idea of "ratting on their fellow students." Statistics gathered nationally demonstrate that in similar attacks, the assailants almost always tell other students in advance about their intent. A betting man would wager, then, that other students at Oak Ridge had prior knowledge the attack was coming and did little if anything to intervene. This troubling inaction poses an interesting question: do our kids possess the ability to morally discriminate between innocuous schoolyard acts (for which remaining mum is perfectly acceptable) and felonious attacks? Why did those who refused to turn in the perpetrators of a vicious crime on their own school grounds, committed before their own eyes, weigh the consequences of silence and then make what is obviously a wrong (and very disturbing) choice? Do they now appreciate how wrong they were to have remained silent? Do they care? How lucky will the next Billy be?

Journal of the Indian Wars \| Civil War Regiments Journal Civil War Books \| Military-Other Titles
Home \| Services \| Books \| About Us \| Submissions \| Contact Us