First of all, please let's not have that inane argument about us, mediawallas, getting only shocked at attacks on well-known public personalities in the national capital while we ignore the thousands across the country who get beaten up or killed by goons, policemen and extremists every day. If it happens under our noses, we take note and expect such occurrences happening elsewhere to elicit a similar response among those who are closer to the theatre of violence. The attack on Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan on Wednesday was captured on national television, pointing to the fact that not only are there people who aren't bothered about unleashing violence in full view, but are mighty proud of their actions.
The goons beat up Mr Bhushan in the latter's office reportedly as a reaction to the lawyer's personal views on Kashmir. Mr Bhushan had apparently riled them by stating (again on national television) that he supported the idea of a plebiscite being conducted in Kashmir. This might not be something that many folks, including those in the PMO, who are hardwired to the notion of 'Kashmir is ours!' and other beliefs would like to hear. But if disagreements merited a straightaway thrashing, then we should have seen much more bodily harm coming the way of, say, the Taliban-esque Sri Ram Sene, than the other way round.
One way of measuring mental thickness is to gauge how someone reacts to something he doesn't agree with. But over the years we have seen that it's the idiots who end up roughing up others even when the disagreement is 'mutual'. One way of turning this situation around is to ensure that loonies who can't handle another point of view are punished by the law. With that not much of a disincentive, might we suggest a (radical but practical) way of dealing with such goons: beat them up on a national reality TV show and shame them for not being able to defend themselves. But we've already gathered that you don't agree with us on this one.