It's an interesting use of language. It objectifies the person, an obviously troubled human being who has come to dire straits and irrational behavior, into the single value of: "He/she Who Has Gun".
This is, I suppose, necessary in warfare. The "Enemy" isn't an individual, with hopes, dreams, family, culture... they're reduced to a single value, which allows us to dispense with them with some degree of impartiality.
But a random man on campus who happens to have a gun? Disarm him, is he still, THE Gunman? Is he now "The Suspect" or "Intruder"? At one point is he just one of us again, if ever?
I know it's simply descriptive, but the psychology of these sorts of words is interesting (and often, disturbing) to me. It's a casual use, and I'm certainly not chastising you for it - just some random thoughts. ;)
no subject
It's an interesting use of language. It objectifies the person, an obviously troubled human being who has come to dire straits and irrational behavior, into the single value of: "He/she Who Has Gun".
This is, I suppose, necessary in warfare. The "Enemy" isn't an individual, with hopes, dreams, family, culture... they're reduced to a single value, which allows us to dispense with them with some degree of impartiality.
But a random man on campus who happens to have a gun? Disarm him, is he still, THE Gunman? Is he now "The Suspect" or "Intruder"? At one point is he just one of us again, if ever?
I know it's simply descriptive, but the psychology of these sorts of words is interesting (and often, disturbing) to me. It's a casual use, and I'm certainly not chastising you for it - just some random thoughts. ;)