Samuel L. Jackson on San Bernardino: “I Really Wanted That to Just be Another, you Know, Crazy White Dude, and not Really Some Muslims”

I think that what he was saying was that if it were a “crazy white dude,” he wouldn’t be as fearful, since we’ve seen that many times already. When he learned that it was a radical Muslim couple, his reaction was, “Oh, s***. It’s here. And it’s here in another kind of way.” In context, he was saying that he didn’t want it to be an act of terrorism, because in his mind, that would be so much worse. That’s why he was hoping it was a crazy white person. The Blaze reported:

In a recent podcast interview with the Hollywood Reporter, actor Samuel L. Jackson opened up about race relations and politics — and explained his reaction to the terror attacks in San Bernardino.

When reports of a shooting at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino started rolling in, Jackson said he hoped it wasn’t an act of terrorism on U.S. soil.

“I can’t even tell you how much that day the thing that happened in San Bernardino … how much I really wanted that to just be another, you know, crazy white dude, and not really some Muslims,” Jackson said. “Because it’s like: ‘Oh, sh*t. It’s here. And it’s here in another kind of way.’”

In his most recent film, “The Hateful Eight,” written and directed by Quentin Tarantino, Jackson plays a Union veteran-turned-bounty-hunter in post-Civil War Western America. Jackson also stars in the new film, “Chi-Raq,” a musical-dramedy about gang culture and gun violence in present-day Chicago.

While establishing motive is important in any murder investigation, one’s motive for murder shouldn’t necessarily change our response or the punishment that the murderer should receive.

Americans are not that different from Samuel L. Jackson in their collective fear of Islamic terrorism. If the San Bernardino shooting had been committed by a crazy white person, Americans would be fearful, but not as fearful as they are now, now that we know the murderers were radical Muslims. It shouldn’t matter who was behind the attack or why they did it. It was murder, and they deserve to be executed.

The implications are perhaps more frightening because of the prospect of suicide terrorism. How do you punish a suicide bomber, if he dies along with all his victims? You can’t. But so many of the “crazy white dude” mass shooters also committed suicide. So, it’s really not any different. They’re mass murder-suicides. Whether the person is committing the act “for Allah” or because he’s pumped up full of psychotropic drugs is irrelevant. It’s still murder.

We’re left with the same question as has been posed since the Aurora theater shooting and Sandy Hook. How do you prevent these occurrences from happening, especially since these shooters often have nothing to lose? One side says we need to crack down on guns with the faint hope of preventing those with criminal intent from having access to them. So far, that’s proven to be unsuccessful to say the least. The other side says we need to encourage ownership and public carrying of firearms, so that in the case of a mass shooting perpetrated by someone who will likely kill himself afterward, a concealed carrier can take him out before it becomes a mass shooting.