Who Should Be Held Responsible?

Since the recent past, there seems to be confusion as to who should be held responsible.

 A few years ago, a woman brought her four-year-old and two year-old children to a water park. She let them enjoy the water park on their own. The two year old got into the water that has artificial waves. Her sibling was there to supervise. The young one drowned. The mother sued.

A young man committed mass murder. This has become a frequent event. The shooter is responsible but what could have prevented them? A wife of a mass assassin lived with him. He had all kinds of weapons. Should she should have called the police and stopped him? Another school shooter was raised by a mother who decided that her son could overcome his mental challenges by learning to shoot guns. He killed her first and then went on a rampage. The families of the victims could not sue his family because they were dead, so they tried to sue that gun manufacturer saying it was their fault because they make guns that were responsible for their childrens' death.

Several shooters were known to have severe psychological problems but those who knew didn't tell police because his danger was confidential. Schools knew about the shooters in several cases but tried counseling rather than alerting the authorities.

A group that represents 13% of the U.S. population accounts for the majority of homicide victims each year and are killed by their own people. We are told that the shooters are not responsible either because they had psychological problems, or they are still mad that their ancestors might have been slaves more than 300 years ago and that they were raised by single mothers. Are the mothers responsible or are the absent fathers? Now 74% of that population is raised by a single mother. 

What about the rest of the world? Why do those in Mexico and Central American countries live in poverty? Is it the parents' fault for having more children than they possibly afford or is it the Spanish who ruled Mexico from 1520 to the early 1800s. It's been 200 years of independence. Was it the Mexican government's fault for massive corruption and mismanagement? Is the U.S. to blame because some citizens buy drugs from Mexico? 

Why is Africa so poor? Is it because they were occupied for many years by European nations? They left a long time ago. Or is it that they sold most of their slaves to the U.S. at least 200 years ago and now are down to only 600,000 slaves. Is it the lack of slaves that causes widespread poverty, corruption and violence or could it be that Africans have some responsiblity for their present condition? 

Can India still blame the English for occupying their country until 70 years ago or is part of the problem that people are having more kids than they can afford and that girls do not get enough education?

What about problems in the Middle East? Is the Middle East so filled with dictators or is it because that has made them more engaged in violence as they are in Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt etc. Should the U.S, the world's 911, have done more to effect change in this countries or did we do too much? 

We invaded Iraq because we felt that the leader did not share our values. That created the Arab Spring. Populations in each of these Arab countries revolted. Now Yemen, Syria, Libya, and Afghanistan are failed states with no leadership and the birthplace of ISIS. In Syria, hundreds of thousands of Syria's population demonstrated insisting that their longtime leader step down, possibly knowing this would not happen without violence. Now 400,000 thousand Syrians have died and 400,000 are suffering after losing their homes and being surrounded by troops killing each other as best they can. Should America have done more or did we do too much?

Who takes responsibility for all these problems and do we even dare think about it? If those who won't take responsibility and blame outside influences that occurred as many as hundreds of years ago, how will situations improve?