An interesting, but more or less predictable perspective:

“They need to catch these kids and make them pay for the damage they have done, teach them a lesson,” Justin Wright said. “It’s not right to damage other people’s property.

This is probably an excerpt from a longer interview, but it’s still interesting insofar as the perspective is oriented around the centrality of (private) property. For many, property is undoubtedly not a negligible element of life, but it’s nonetheless worth noting that property is especially important to those who own property. One question, then, is whether “lesson” proposed includes incorporating the violators into property owners proper or, at least, subjects willing and intending to reproduce a system of private property?

What’s striking is the elevation of damage to property to the same level as potential injury to or loss of life. Moreover, these two threads are somehow the only points worth reporting. What’s interesting, then, is this particular way of abbreviating what must have been a much longer story. Surely this cannot be all that is relevant to the story?