with DeadSun

You've seen him in Fan Speak all around the antiMUSIC network, now DeadSun gets his big show as the host of his very own talk show,  The Not Quite-So DeadShow ! Forget Oprah and Dr. Phil, DeadSun knows how to liven up a talk show. 

disclaimer for lawyers and dumbasses: Please read the disclaimer before proceeding with this article. the disclaimer is included here-in by reference.

If you are under the age of 17, this article is not meant for you so please bugger off. For those too lazy to click what follows is parody and celebrity a**holes are impersonated

As I write this, Alfonso Ignacio Morales is standing trial, having been charged with the brutal murder of four people.

Throughout the duration of the trial so far, witnesses have come forward to describe a young man who was mild mannered, courteous, and friendly to the people whom he ultimately wound up butchering. There is no hard evidence to support the notion that Morales had a drug problem, and he has no past history of violence. If convicted, Morales could be sentenced to death. Suffice it to say that the search is on for answers... and therefore all three rings of the Media Circus are open for business. As is often the case within our victim role-based society, I once again find myself being indirectly instructed to look everywhere else BUT the individual who acted out the event. How about drugs? Did he have a drug problem? Drugs are always good in that regard. "He was fine until the drugs took hold of him". I guess he didn't have a drug problem, and so we'll just have to keep digging. Did he come from a broken home? Nothing mitigates a homicidal atrocity quite as well as when we learn that a killer had a difficult childhood. I guess that doesn't apply here as well, either. 

Now I'm stumped. Naturally, any reasonable, educated person should have long since discarded the notion that an individual does something horrible, because there is something inside of the individual that is horrible, and that all blame rests squarely on the shoulders of said individual. Right?    

Of course not. 

In the kind of time honored, sinister innuendo that makes for smashing sensationalism, it has been ominously reported that--- according to witness testimony--- Alfonso Ignacio Morales often dressed in black. In addition to this great, decisive element, we are informed with both brevity and (presumably) insight that Alfonso Ignacio Morales was not only an avid fan of the band Slayer, but wore a shirt that depicted the band at the time he allegedly committed these heinous crimes.

Now we're getting somewhere. It was the music. The music inspired him to dress in black--- "phase one", if you will--- and then, for the coup de grace, emboldened him to kill. 

Is it my imagination, or do you think someone is trying to sell a few extra copies of the Sunday news?

Is this anything new? 

Never mind the legitimate argument that this is insulting to the friends and family of the real victims, and that the media are once more set into a predictable pattern whereupon they behave like creeps. The media may only be doing what comes natural to them, but I think that scary ramifications arise whenever we begin to disolve the boundaries which establish the culpability of the individual. It is bad enough being in a world that is home to a school of thought which teaches us that everybody is a victim--- even (somehow) those who are the victimizers themselves. I'm fairly certain we don't need the media helping us along in this capacity, because this mentality always seems to result in governmental intervention.  

During the 1930's, the United States Congress warned parents that jazz music might turn their teenagers into "dope fiends". By 1968, Charles Manson believed that he could communicate telepathically with The Beatles, and that the song "Revelation 9" was actually an encoded metaphor which heralded the coming of a great race war. In 1985, the media took great delight inexorably linking Richard Ramirez, better known as the "Night Stalker", with AC/DC's album "Highway to Hell". In 1988, an attempt was made to bring legal charges against Ozzy Osbourne for the suicide of a teenager whom he had never made any contact with on any level. The same mighty finger of blame found its way to Judas Priest in 1990. In 1996, the parents of a murdered teen brought Slayer and its record label up on wrongful death charges. Jumping tracks over to the realm of film, the Supreme Court (in 1999) ruled to allow a law suit to move forward against the makers of "Natural Born Killers". With the current case against Morales, we may SOON be back for another round of "rock music is the devil, call the PMRC, set up Senate hearings, and the record industry had better start policing itself, or we're going to move forward with OUR proposals". You think I'm an alarmist? Think back. Hell, just read this paragraph again. Were any of you around in 1985, when Tipper Gore and Susan Baker embarked on their Crusade against "porn rock"? Many would argue that the PMRC has even more clout than it did twenty years, only that they wisely stay off of the radar these days.   

Naturally, this causes me to do something that I have been doing relentlessly since I could speak--- something which, I have found, always seems to frustrate those who find themselves in the enviable position of always knowing what is best for everybody else: I ask questions.

Question: Could words, devoid of atomic structure, have physically caused Alfonso Ignacio Morales to murder? No. If he is found guilty, could these lyrics have, by way of suggestion, induced Morales to murder? Some will disagree--- but my answer is still "no". 

I will entertain, for the sake of debate, that they did. Let us assume, for just a moment, that Morales was but a puppet on a string, under the spell of Slayer lyrics. 

Questions: How come the lyrics don't compel me to murder anybody, everytime I pop Slayer into my cd player? Apparently, these lyrics, allegedly capable of inspiring good citizens to kill, somehow have the power to CHOOSE who falls into their evil clutches. Are these magic lyrics? Like smart bombs? 

To me, logic dictates that, at the very best, these lyrics would have to be regarded as so sophisticated, they can select SPECIFIC individual targets in those whom the lyrics wish to do their bidding.Otherwise, we would have over 2.8 million mass murderering Slayer fans on our hands--- hell, I would be one of them. I think that ultimately, it's a silly argument to uphold. The problem is, nobody kills because they are "killer" anymore. Nobody steals because they're a thief. Nobody rapes because they're a rapist. No. The drugs did it. His father didn't love him enough. His classmates teased him. She was wearing a rather short skirt, you know. Here's another one: HE SUCCUMBED TO ROCK LYRICS. 

What a bunch of insincere garbage. 

Leave my First Ammendment rights alone. We can do without the media ghouls throwing these idiotic, logically deficient sentiments around, in a blithe attempt to yank heartstrings and prey upon the irrational fears of out of touch parents and over-zealous, faith-based groups. We know the course that this sort of phenomenon charts for itself. We can do without our Senators and Representatives establishing a government oversight committee, and charging said committee with the function of deciding what is harmful matter to our ears and eyes. This isn't network television and radio that we're talking about, ladies and gents.

In the meantime, be on guard. Whether they are coming from the political Left or the Right, there is no shortage of persons in our world who presume to know what is best for you and I, and they are going to seize upon ANY incident that affords them the oppurtunity to advance their own agenda. 

... and if any of those persons happen to be reading this, please--- leave my music to ME. Leave my film to ME. Leave my thoughts to ME. Leave my language to ME.

I'll do the same for you.

Promise.

DS