I'm personally working on a thread that is similar to the last paragraph of goofyfoot's post and hope to have it posted at some point
Hi Jef, thanks for your encouraging remarks, I'm sure GoOfYFoOt will share equally in my sentiment. Please let us know when you have your posting up
and running, I'll see if there's something I can contribute.
As the OP stated,before we can expect gun owners to willingly give up their firearms,we must find a way to insure that they no longer
need those firearms for protection of family and self.
Hi Claro, thanks for joining in with us, it's great to have you here.
You provide a commentary that brings much discussion, many thoughts and
perceptions that need to be explored, cogently, rationally, reasonably, if we are to make any kind of headway towards a plausible solution.
This,to my mind, is just not possible.
With great appreciation I must disagree with you, but not without showing a deep respect to the profound hurdles that necessarily need to be overcome.
I would agree with you that in the short-term, and as things stand, it is nigh on impossible, but in the long-term, I don't believe it is so.
However, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the solution can only be found in one of the two following ways...the federal way, or the
American people way.
Both are fraught with a danger of disconnection, of radical separation and polarisation, of weaking the adhesion of the glue that bonds American
society. The former choice is one that will be seen to disenfranchise the American people from their rights, and thus will be viewed as further
corrosion upon their liberties and freedoms. The latter choice, the one that I would prefer if I were an American, would be a more grassroots
solution, would take longer, but would be driven by the American people, for the American people. The solution really does lay within the heart and
mind of everyone of you, but the choices, the introspection, the necessary change will be hard.
The federal way would be forced, and bring with it all manner of deep suspicions and distrust. It would raise a 'hue and cry' for the protection of
'liberties' and 'freedoms', and it would polarise the American people, pitting the ideology of each American against the other. The attack upon
Sandy Hook Elementary has already forced Obama's hand...he has to respond, he has no choice. The thing is, he has to act swiftly, he has to ride the
wave of distress and distraught that flows around the country. It will embolden him to cut deep into the political pariah that gun control is. The
presidential office will feel mandated to place radical restrictions on the sale and distribution of 'semi' and 'automatic' guns. Whatever he
does, it will be called a 'solution', but it will not be 'the' solution.
The 'real' one and only 'true' solution is to be found at grassroots level. The solution will not work coming from the 'top' down, it has to
come from the 'bottom' up. It is in the communities, at street level, where the disarming has to voluntarily begin. You could call it 'The Newtown
Initiative', a long-term plan for the whole of America.
Communities have to reach out to each other, and not view each other as separate competitors. Communities have to become an interconnected web for
piecemeal disarming. Delegations will need to be elected with representatives from all walks of life, and from all levels of society, with group-run,
group-decision making capacity. No one person must make any decision, only group vote will decide. A mission goal will need to be written out of an
agreed nation-wide consensus, and it must be a social promise to all victims of mass and isolated shootings. It must be capable of dissolving and
crossing all boundaries. It has to be an ideology for the preservation of life. Above all else, the dynamism of the movement has to remain at
The main aim of the 'Newtown Initiative' would be to create dialogue first and foremost, across boundaries, across whatever divide exists. It cannot
be forced. it has to have the heart of altruism. It will have its enemies, its detractors, and for many periods, it will seem as if nothing is getting
done, that it is a failure from the start. It will not be true.
It will be neither anti-gun, nor pro-gun, it will embrace both stances, for without doing so, dialogue will not be able to take place. You must first
disarm the ideology of the gun before you can disarm its holster, and that means discussing the 'need' for it, and the 'fear' of not having it.
Americans have to learn to not fear each other.
(I will continue this diatribe later on...life intrudes) Peace.