In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Prove Commitment to Peace: Post 'No Guns Here' on Lawn
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Prove Commitment to Peace: Post 'No Guns Here' on Lawn Sunday, October 14, 2001 BY GILES LARSEN During the ongoing gun rights/gun control debate we have heard a challenge from pro-gun advocates to those who decry the militarization of domestic life. The dare is for anyone to post a sign outside of their residence advertising the absence of firearms on their property. We, the members of the Wasatch Peace Team (WPT), think that this is a great idea. We firmly believe that we can not afford to rely on our rights alone to reduce the violence in our world; our hearts must join us in the task as well. We will hence post a sign on our residence similar in appearance to the house alarm signs which proliferate our neighborhoods. The difference is, our signs will say that our home is "protected by compassionate nonviolence." We take this action in full awareness of the implications these signs will have on the world and ourselves. Far from naive passivity, this action is a form of proactive nonviolence which is taken in every moment of our daily lives. Proactive nonviolence does not wait for a threatening situation to respond to, but rather initiates creative means of preventing violence from happening in the first place. These principles, with the exception of the first, are subjective so that their application will not hinder our better judgment. In other words, we are not inviting "bad people" to take advantage of us. On the contrary, we are reaching out with compassion to restore the bonds of our entire community. Here is the foundation of our commitment: Our nation cannot claim to be whole as long as its citizens share the same definition of peace and safety as that of its military: perpetual pre-hostility. Under this erroneous notion, peace is relegated to an intermission between ongoing violent conflict and tension. This ideology, reminiscent of the Cold War, is precisely the view of those who feel that only an arms race between law-abiding citizens and law-breaking criminals is the solution to violent crime. Reflecting our collective withdrawal from our surroundings and the subsequent militarization of our communities, each residence has become its own kingdom, with an invasion of foreigners subject to harsh retaliation. However, much like our real-life military, we are first and foremost the victim of our own self-induced fear, which conjures up all sorts of terrifying threats to our security. This fear is often directed by scapegoating a politically vulnerable target without truly understanding the intricacies of the situation. When guns are the target, pro-gun advocates are quick to recognize the scapegoating process in motion (Guns don't kill people, people kill people). Nevertheless, they are the first to fall into the same trap by scapegoating criminals, drug users and the mentally ill. Many are comfortable condemning the individuals in these groups as the root of the problem due to their lack of personal responsibility. Responsibility is indeed paramount, but to pinpoint an individual or group as the root of the problem is to ignore the fact that we exist in a dynamic system of relationships in our local, national and global communities. We are not simply autonomous individuals, but also spokes in an interdependent society. Personal responsibility must be greased with social responsibility for the wheel to spin unhindered. The message which an uninvited guest delivers when they break into our home is that our social responsibilities need tending to. Unfortunately, at this point the crisis has already arrived. If we silence forever that intruder with a bullet because we were "left with no choice," the facade of security bestowed by the firearm reveals a grave powerlessness: victimized once by the intruder, and again by being backed into the position of taking the life of another. The cycle of bloodshed will continue until we grasp this message deep within our hearts. Often content to place the blame of society's moral decay on the classic scapegoat, that which we call "evil" (be it selfishness, anger, hatred, etc.), we cease to recognize a far more debilitating moral disease: a profound indifference to the connections which thread us to the world one step beyond our lives. Indifference, much like the AIDS virus, does no direct harm to its host, instead it weakens our moral immune system to the point that we silently betray humanity. While we generally condemn overt acts of physical and mental violence, indifference enables a violence which is not always direct nor immediate. Abuses of inmates in prison, exploitation of workers, and holocausts are allowed to occur when people turn the other way. Furthermore, modern weaponry lends indifference with no better an outlet with the excessive ease with which one can thoughtlessly pull a trigger. It takes an entirely more bloodthirsty individual to settle a dispute by smashing in someone's jaw, face down in a gutter, than someone who participates in a cowardly drive-by shooting. We should not kid ourselves: Technology certainly does kill, because the possibility of committing horrible violence is opened up to people who aren't necessarily themselves violent. Pro-gun advocates extol the virtue of armed individuals who abide by our laws of personal responsibility as the ultimate good guys. However, regardless of how reasonable or even heroic this standard may appear in light of a kill-or-be-killed situation, legal murder will not bring an end to the commonly shared disease of social irresponsibility that likely gave rise to the conflict in the first place. It only executes the messenger, and provides an indeterminate intermission of peace within the context of perpetual pre-hostility. Without creative proactive efforts, guns won't liberate us, they will only condemn us to a false sense of security, and a fickle heart which demonizes our brothers and sisters. Our legally granted rights set the foundation, not the ceiling, of our moral potential. Laws cannot mandate the principles we have herein committed to; it requires a heart which genuinely seeks a peaceful, healthy community. All we have to ask ourselves is, if we could live in a society rooted in the principles below, wouldn't we want to? Protected by compassionate nonviolence, No guns here, All are welcome, We will share what we can, Enough is enough. What's stopping us? Only through unity, with a common sense of our shared responsibilities, may we be rid of our shared disease. _________ Giles Larsen lives in Salt Lake City http://www.sltrib.com/2001/oct/10142001/commenta/139919.htm
Comments
So many guns to buy. So little money.
I can't come to work today. The voices said, STAY HOME AND CLEAN THE GUNS!
I'M PRO CHOICE! I CHOOSE to hunt, trap, eat meat and wear fur!!
"To meet with ill fortune is to meet with good fortune. To meet with submission is to meet an enemy."
Home of the Blue Angels, P'colaSemper Paratus
" Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects" Will Rogers