Legion said:
I don't know... I mean if you were really close to the high score...
Seriously though, this is pretty disturbing. I mean, I can understand being paralysed with fear, but to not even notice/react when it is happening right next to you is just wrong.
I wonder how the people who know them will react after seeing the footage/news.
It's actually very easy to do depending on the enviroment your used to, and how you've trained your reactions. As I've mentioned before I grew up in residential facilities and the like due to the way my brain damage effected me, I was pretty mssed up. However in such an enviroment you have kids flipping out all the time, fights, and of course teachers and staff doing all kinds of stupid things themselves. You also wind up having very limited/controlled time for everything, so you learn to zone it out and focus on whatever your doing, even when kids are say jumping off desks
and stuff in front of you.
It's also something I wound up refining when I worked casino security, because if I'm say writing a report on an incident I handled, I kind of have to zone out what else might be going on at any given moment, so I can do what I have to do, and then get back out there (so to speak).
There is also the general nature of organized crime in certain areas, combined with concern over penelties from the actual authorities for getting involved. The whole "Kitty Genevieve" incident really happened (it's referanced in Watchmen as well, Rorscharch's mask being made from her dress), that's a case where a girl was literally chased down and stabbed to death in front of a bunch of bystanders, but nobody wanted to get involved and intervene due to fear of the repercussions from tha law, both civil and criminal.
The point being is that fear of either element is why someone might intentionally "zone out" and act like nothing is happening, and if they come from an enviroment where "it's better to not get involved" has been a survival mechanism for a while, this can be pretty common. Understand that one display of power made by criminals, even here in the US, is how some gang banger might come up and blow some dude away in the middle of the street in front of witnesses. The point being that nobody is going to say or do crap because they are afraid of what his people are going to do to them if they do.
You'll notice that while terrifying, the lack of reaction among the lady we're paticularly looking at also kept her out of the press, which could very well be the entire point.... it worked, and thus such behavior is encouraged.
Now I'm not saying any of these things are nessicarly true in this situation, just that I understand how it can happen, and we also see it in the US.
To be honest I blame liberals in the US for a lot of it. No matter how many times we've effectively tried to extend "good samaritan" type laws to extend to people intervening in assaults, they inevitably wind up backfiring. Complaints about excessive force, discrimination, or seriously slamming people who *ahem* didn't know what was going on, when they get involved. Heck, it's gotten to the point where there is so much anti-violence garbage and protection/recourse for criminals that you can't even defend your own home in many cases without opening up
the possibility of being sued by say a gun toting intruder.
Case in point, your walking down the street, some dude comes running out chasing a girl with a butcher knife and grabs her. If you jump in and take the guy down with extreme predjudice, using whatever is at hand, and really there is no other way to fight if you don't want to risk getting yourself killed or prevent him from stabbing anyone else, you open up all kinds of doors if it's some kind of domestic and they both claim "they were just playing", or how you misunderstood the situation. If the guy happens to be a minority and your not, he can also play the race card and say your reaction was based on discrimination. Even if you can protect yourself criminally, that doesn't mean you can protect yourself civilly if he comes after you for injuries, damage to reputation, or whatever other piece of garbage could be thrown at you. In some states it's outright illegal to intervene, since anyone in a confrontation is under obligation to flee, as a way of cutting down on general violence. As a citizen unless your personally threatened and for some reason unable to flee the scene, your only legal recourse is to try and contact the authorities. The arguement being bureaucratically that it's better to have a few people stabbed to death (or whatever) while nobody reacts than open the door to thousands of ambigious cases of assault, self defense, etc... many of which are going to carry every legal trick in the book on both sides (claims of discrimination, etc...) which represent a "no win scenario" for the state where it's going to take flak no matter what it does, as well as spending tons of resources prosecuting what
could be very long and complicated cases.
In short we live in a truely borked world, while I don't agree with this, I at least understand it. I especially understand it when you consider the sheer level of power organized crime has in Asia, and we're probably dealing with a lot of relatively poor people involved in that. After all the crowd was using systems to game in an internet cafe, which while not uncommon (yet) puts them outside the group of increasingly successful Koreans who have their own computers (which is growing apparently). Right now you can make a degree of "class" judgement simply based on an enviroment, more so than you might have been able to in years past. As I said above, this could very well be a case where everyone involved figures the stabbing is gang/organized crime related, and nobody says/does anything or reacts out of fear. Some are just better/more trained than others. Their perspective could very well be it's better to let someone get butchered and do absolutly nothing, than be the next one butchered.