Randomness

For some strange reason this week I have been watching the nightly local news. The news, you ask? Yeah, I know. Anyway, I've seen at least three segments where a reporter was interviewing a neighbor or some dude on the street who saw a news event unfold.

The second or third thing out of their mouths was "They must have been on drugs or something." OK, now why is this always the canned go-to statement? Do the reporters coax these people to say this prior to taping? Do they word their questions in a way that being on drugs is the only valid answer? Are we so robotic in our thinking and quick to judge that there can be no other correct answer? What if the person had a mental disorder or was developmentally challenged? What if the person in question was Nell.

Person does something crazy equals person must have been on drugs. I think in a majority of situations this is the case, but let's not jump to conclusions, folks. Why don't we say "They must have had a wild hare"? Or "She must have lost the bet"? Why do we need to say anything that refers to the person’s mental or altered state of mind at all? We don't know what led this person to do what he or she might have done.

Why do we always have a preconceived rationale when we don't know all the facts? Why are we always so quick to judge when we don't know the person?

I don't condone bad behavior, and this may be an extreme example, but why do we judge those we do not know? Why do we always assume the worst?

Just asking.