Want gun control? Fight smart.

OldLady

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2015
69,568
19,600
2,220
I was going to compose a letter to these young whippersnappers today, telling them that they are the voice of hope, but only if they refrain from the usual screeching and name calling and hyperbolic empty rhetoric that passes for political "debate" these days. I didn't have to write it--David Brooks already did.
I wanted to share it with all of you, and hope/wish you will all read it and think about it.

DAVID BROOKS

Respect First, Then Gun Control
Image
merlin_134163675_7afe0555-aabb-4217-a80b-1e76a858205a-articleLarge.jpg

Students and family members gathered at a makeshift memorial for the victims of last week’s school shooting in Parkland, Fla.CreditMark Wilson/Getty Images North America
Image
brooks-circular-thumbLarge-v7.jpg

By David Brooks

Feb. 19, 2018
This has been an emotional week. We greet tragedies like the school shooting in Florida with shock, sadness, mourning and grief that turns into indignation and rage. The anger inevitably gets directed at the N.R.A., those who support gun rights, and the politicians who refuse to do anything while children die.

Many of us walked this emotional path. But we may end up doing more harm than good. If there’s one thing we’ve learned, it is that guns have become a cultural flash point in a nation that is unequal and divided. The people who defend gun rights believe that snobbish elites look down on their morals and want to destroy their culture. If we end up telling such people that they and their guns are despicable, they will just despise us back and dig in their heels.

So if you want to stop school shootings it’s not enough just to vent and march. It’s necessary to let people from Red America lead the way, and to show respect to gun owners at all points. There has to be trust and respect first. Then we can strike a compromise on guns as guns, and not some sacred cross in the culture war.

So I’ve been thinking about a group that’s in the trust and respect business. Better Angels is a nonprofit led by David Lapp, David Blankenhorn and a prominent family therapist, Bill Doherty. The team members travel from town to town finding members of the Red and Blue Tribes and bringing them together for long, humbling conversations.

My Times colleague April Lawson has gotten involved with Better Angels and has been reporting back on its techniques.

One of the most successful parts of the structured conversations is built around stereotypes. Doherty, the head moderator, asks the people at each gathering to name five major stereotypes that the other side throws at them. The Republicans invariably list “racist” first, followed by, say, “uncaring,” “uneducated,” “misogynistic” and “science deniers.”


You have 2 free articles remaining.

Subscribe to The Times


In a session Lawson attended, a Trump supporter acknowledged that the G.O.P. has had a spotty record on racial matters, but it’s important to him that Blues know that’s not why he holds his opinions.

Doherty says that the Reds feel shamed by the Blues to a much greater degree than the Blues realize. Reds are very reluctant to enter into a conversation with Blues, for fear of further shaming, but they often come to the table when they are told that this will be a chance to “de-monsterize” themselves.

At that session one Blue said she was really grateful to hear a Red acknowledge the Republican history on race. When Blues are asked about the stereotypes thrown at them, they tend to list “against religion and morality,” “unpatriotic” and “against personal responsibility” among their responses. They, too, relish the chance to clear the air.

After the stereotypes are discussed, the room feels different. As one Red in Ohio told Lawson, “I think we are all pretty clear on one thing: Don’t tell us who we are and what we think.” Another Red was moved almost to tears by the damage categories do. “We’re not just cookie-cutter people; we’re individuals. Just because you don’t like something, you don’t have to ridicule it — you probably don’t understand it,” she said. “When someone’s heart is full up with something, and then you demean it without even listening to them — I hate that.”

The discussions reveal other sensitivities. Some Blues didn’t want to enter a venue that had a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag on the wall. To Reds that was a neutral flag from American history, but to Blues it carried all sorts of nasty associations. Reds were offended by the lawn signs that said, “Hate Has No Home Here.” The implication: Hate has no home in my house, but it does in yours.

In another exercise, Reds and Blues ask each other honest, nonleading questions. Blues may ask Reds, “Name a safety-net program you can support.” Reds may ask Blues, “How do you balance having a heart with keeping health care costs under control?”

By the end of the conversations, the atmosphere has changed. Nearly always somebody will say that the discussion was easy because only moderates were in the room, not the people who post crazy stuff on Facebook. The staff tries not to smile, knowing that some of the people were selected precisely because of the intense stuff they posted on Facebook.

“This is not a civility organization,” Blankenhorn told Lawson. Better Angels is aiming to build a group of people whose personal bonds with their fellow citizens redefine how they engage in the political system.

We don’t really have policy debates anymore. We have one big tribal conflict, and policy fights are just proxy battles as each side tries to establish moral superiority. But just as the tribal mentality has been turned on, it can be turned off. Then and only then can we go back to normal politics and take reasonable measures to keep our children safe.


Michelle Goldberg is off today.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

A version of this article appears in print on February 20, 2018, on Page A19 of the New York edition with the headline: Respect First, Then Gun Control. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
 
Last edited:
In a session Lawson attended, a Trump supporter acknowledged that the G.O.P. has had a spotty record on racial matters, but it’s important to him that Blues know that’s not why he holds his opinions.

Doherty says that the Reds feel shamed by the Blues to a much greater degree than the Blues realize. Reds are very reluctant to enter into a conversation with Blues, for fear of further shaming, but they often come to the table when they are told that this will be a chance to “de-monsterize” themselves.

At that session one Blue said she was really grateful to hear a Red acknowledge the Republican history on race. When Blues are asked about the stereotypes thrown at them, they tend to list “against religion and morality,” “unpatriotic” and “against personal responsibility” among their responses. They, too, relish the chance to clear the air.

After the stereotypes are discussed, the room feels different. As one Red in Ohio told Lawson, “I think we are all pretty clear on one thing: Don’t tell us who we are and what we think.” Another Red was moved almost to tears by the damage categories do. “We’re not just cookie-cutter people; we’re individuals. Just because you don’t like something, you don’t have to ridicule it — you probably don’t understand it,” she said. “When someone’s heart is full up with something, and then you demean it without even listening to them — I hate that.”

The discussions reveal other sensitivities. Some Blues didn’t want to enter a venue that had a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag on the wall. To Reds that was a neutral flag from American history, but to Blues it carried all sorts of nasty associations. Reds were offended by the lawn signs that said, “Hate Has No Home Here.” The implication: Hate has no home in my house, but it does in yours.

In another exercise, Reds and Blues ask each other honest, nonleading questions. Blues may ask Reds, “Name a safety-net program you can support.” Reds may ask Blues, “How do you balance having a heart with keeping health care costs under control?”

By the end of the conversations, the atmosphere has changed. Nearly always somebody will say that the discussion was easy because only moderates were in the room, not the people who post crazy stuff on Facebook. The staff tries not to smile, knowing that some of the people were selected precisely because of the intense stuff they posted on Facebook.

“This is not a civility organization,” Blankenhorn told Lawson. Better Angels is aiming to build a group of people whose personal bonds with their fellow citizens redefine how they engage in the political system.

We don’t really have policy debates anymore. We have one big tribal conflict, and policy fights are just proxy battles as each side tries to establish moral superiority. But just as the tribal mentality has been turned on, it can be turned off. Then and only then can we go back to normal politics and take reasonable measures to keep our children safe.


Michelle Goldberg is off today.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

A version of this article appears in print on February 20, 2018, on Page A19 of the New York edition with the headline: Respect First, Then Gun Control. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
That is actually not bad, I think the trick is to keep the professional pundits out of the room
 
Clearly. What we need to solve the problem of wackos shooting people is to have more workshops teaching us how to fight.
 
I would love to know what law would have stopped that kid from shooting up the school.
The law that says a person can't buy a hand gun until they are 21, should have included semi automatics like the AR15.
18 year olds love to hunt. I am sure they appreciate you stripping their freedoms for being COMPLETELY innocent.
Even if, he would have just used something else. So, what kind of law would have stopped him from shooting up that school?
 
I would love to know what law would have stopped that kid from shooting up the school.
Well there was one law back during Jimmy Carters regime, and that was to allow insane people back into society. That right there started the closing of asylums that would of kept people who want to hurt themselves and others.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=32339
I am today submitting to Congress the Mental Health Systems Act. This proposed legislation establishes a new partnership between the federal government and the states in the planning 'and provision of mental health services. It seeks to assure that the chronically mentally ill no longer face the cruel alternative of unnecessary institutionalization or inadequate care in the community.
When these sick people were allowed out of the institution, soon there were razor blades in apples and needles in candy bars at Halloween. And the rest is history....Liberal compassion ends up killing people...
 
In a session Lawson attended, a Trump supporter acknowledged that the G.O.P. has had a spotty record on racial matters, but it’s important to him that Blues know that’s not why he holds his opinions.

Doherty says that the Reds feel shamed by the Blues to a much greater degree than the Blues realize. Reds are very reluctant to enter into a conversation with Blues, for fear of further shaming, but they often come to the table when they are told that this will be a chance to “de-monsterize” themselves.

At that session one Blue said she was really grateful to hear a Red acknowledge the Republican history on race. When Blues are asked about the stereotypes thrown at them, they tend to list “against religion and morality,” “unpatriotic” and “against personal responsibility” among their responses. They, too, relish the chance to clear the air.

After the stereotypes are discussed, the room feels different. As one Red in Ohio told Lawson, “I think we are all pretty clear on one thing: Don’t tell us who we are and what we think.” Another Red was moved almost to tears by the damage categories do. “We’re not just cookie-cutter people; we’re individuals. Just because you don’t like something, you don’t have to ridicule it — you probably don’t understand it,” she said. “When someone’s heart is full up with something, and then you demean it without even listening to them — I hate that.”

The discussions reveal other sensitivities. Some Blues didn’t want to enter a venue that had a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag on the wall. To Reds that was a neutral flag from American history, but to Blues it carried all sorts of nasty associations. Reds were offended by the lawn signs that said, “Hate Has No Home Here.” The implication: Hate has no home in my house, but it does in yours.

In another exercise, Reds and Blues ask each other honest, nonleading questions. Blues may ask Reds, “Name a safety-net program you can support.” Reds may ask Blues, “How do you balance having a heart with keeping health care costs under control?”

By the end of the conversations, the atmosphere has changed. Nearly always somebody will say that the discussion was easy because only moderates were in the room, not the people who post crazy stuff on Facebook. The staff tries not to smile, knowing that some of the people were selected precisely because of the intense stuff they posted on Facebook.

“This is not a civility organization,” Blankenhorn told Lawson. Better Angels is aiming to build a group of people whose personal bonds with their fellow citizens redefine how they engage in the political system.

We don’t really have policy debates anymore. We have one big tribal conflict, and policy fights are just proxy battles as each side tries to establish moral superiority. But just as the tribal mentality has been turned on, it can be turned off. Then and only then can we go back to normal politics and take reasonable measures to keep our children safe.


Michelle Goldberg is off today.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

A version of this article appears in print on February 20, 2018, on Page A19 of the New York edition with the headline: Respect First, Then Gun Control. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

You're talking about taking all the fun out of partisan politics.

Luckily, history has proved that hotter heads will always prevail

andrewjackson-assasination-attempt-with-caning-and-guns-pinterest.jpg
 
I would love to know what law would have stopped that kid from shooting up the school.
Well there was one law back during Jimmy Carters regime, and that was to allow insane people back into society. That right there started the closing of asylums that would of kept people who want to hurt themselves and others.

Jimmy Carter: Mental Health Systems Legislation Message to the Congress Transmitting the Proposed Legislation.
I am today submitting to Congress the Mental Health Systems Act. This proposed legislation establishes a new partnership between the federal government and the states in the planning 'and provision of mental health services. It seeks to assure that the chronically mentally ill no longer face the cruel alternative of unnecessary institutionalization or inadequate care in the community.
When these sick people were allowed out of the institution, soon there were razor blades in apples and needles in candy bars at Halloween. And the rest is history....Liberal compassion ends up killing people...
Mental health laws wouldnt have stopped this guy either. He was apparently OKd by the FBI (or did they just forget?) AND the state welfare office. The childrens office deemed him perfectly sane.
 
I would love to know what law would have stopped that kid from shooting up the school.
The law that says a person can't buy a hand gun until they are 21, should have included semi automatics like the AR15.
18 year olds love to hunt. I am sure they appreciate you stripping their freedoms for being COMPLETELY innocent.
Even if, he would have just used something else. So, what kind of law would have stopped him from shooting up that school?
AR 15 s Are not hunting long guns.
 
I would love to know what law would have stopped that kid from shooting up the school.
The law that says a person can't buy a hand gun until they are 21, should have included semi automatics like the AR15.
18 year olds love to hunt. I am sure they appreciate you stripping their freedoms for being COMPLETELY innocent.
Even if, he would have just used something else. So, what kind of law would have stopped him from shooting up that school?
AR 15 s Are not hunting long guns.
They are rifles. Maybe what you should have said was "ban the ar15"
He would have just used another gun. SO, what law would have stopped him from shooting up the school?
 
In a session Lawson attended, a Trump supporter acknowledged that the G.O.P. has had a spotty record on racial matters, but it’s important to him that Blues know that’s not why he holds his opinions.

Doherty says that the Reds feel shamed by the Blues to a much greater degree than the Blues realize. Reds are very reluctant to enter into a conversation with Blues, for fear of further shaming, but they often come to the table when they are told that this will be a chance to “de-monsterize” themselves.

At that session one Blue said she was really grateful to hear a Red acknowledge the Republican history on race. When Blues are asked about the stereotypes thrown at them, they tend to list “against religion and morality,” “unpatriotic” and “against personal responsibility” among their responses. They, too, relish the chance to clear the air.

After the stereotypes are discussed, the room feels different. As one Red in Ohio told Lawson, “I think we are all pretty clear on one thing: Don’t tell us who we are and what we think.” Another Red was moved almost to tears by the damage categories do. “We’re not just cookie-cutter people; we’re individuals. Just because you don’t like something, you don’t have to ridicule it — you probably don’t understand it,” she said. “When someone’s heart is full up with something, and then you demean it without even listening to them — I hate that.”

The discussions reveal other sensitivities. Some Blues didn’t want to enter a venue that had a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag on the wall. To Reds that was a neutral flag from American history, but to Blues it carried all sorts of nasty associations. Reds were offended by the lawn signs that said, “Hate Has No Home Here.” The implication: Hate has no home in my house, but it does in yours.

In another exercise, Reds and Blues ask each other honest, nonleading questions. Blues may ask Reds, “Name a safety-net program you can support.” Reds may ask Blues, “How do you balance having a heart with keeping health care costs under control?”

By the end of the conversations, the atmosphere has changed. Nearly always somebody will say that the discussion was easy because only moderates were in the room, not the people who post crazy stuff on Facebook. The staff tries not to smile, knowing that some of the people were selected precisely because of the intense stuff they posted on Facebook.

“This is not a civility organization,” Blankenhorn told Lawson. Better Angels is aiming to build a group of people whose personal bonds with their fellow citizens redefine how they engage in the political system.

We don’t really have policy debates anymore. We have one big tribal conflict, and policy fights are just proxy battles as each side tries to establish moral superiority. But just as the tribal mentality has been turned on, it can be turned off. Then and only then can we go back to normal politics and take reasonable measures to keep our children safe.


Michelle Goldberg is off today.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

A version of this article appears in print on February 20, 2018, on Page A19 of the New York edition with the headline: Respect First, Then Gun Control. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

You're talking about taking all the fun out of partisan politics.

Luckily, history has proved that hotter heads will always prevail

andrewjackson-assasination-attempt-with-caning-and-guns-pinterest.jpg
Unfortunately, you're right.
 
I would love to know what law would have stopped that kid from shooting up the school.
The law that says a person can't buy a hand gun until they are 21, should have included semi automatics like the AR15.
18 year olds love to hunt. I am sure they appreciate you stripping their freedoms for being COMPLETELY innocent.
Even if, he would have just used something else. So, what kind of law would have stopped him from shooting up that school?
AR 15 s Are not hunting long guns.
They are rifles. Maybe what you should have said was "ban the ar15"?
I DID SAY THAT.......You need more coffee!:lol:
 
I would love to know what law would have stopped that kid from shooting up the school.
Well there was one law back during Jimmy Carters regime, and that was to allow insane people back into society. That right there started the closing of asylums that would of kept people who want to hurt themselves and others.

Jimmy Carter: Mental Health Systems Legislation Message to the Congress Transmitting the Proposed Legislation.
I am today submitting to Congress the Mental Health Systems Act. This proposed legislation establishes a new partnership between the federal government and the states in the planning 'and provision of mental health services. It seeks to assure that the chronically mentally ill no longer face the cruel alternative of unnecessary institutionalization or inadequate care in the community.
When these sick people were allowed out of the institution, soon there were razor blades in apples and needles in candy bars at Halloween. And the rest is history....Liberal compassion ends up killing people...
Mental health laws wouldnt have stopped this guy either. He was apparently OKd by the FBI (or did they just forget?) AND the state welfare office. The childrens office deemed him perfectly sane.
What I heard over the weekend was about a kid who had explosive moments. He was always calm enough when the police or social workers arrived to be deemed "not a threat." He lived with the new family for over three months and was quiet, polite and followed all their rules. He was loving to their animals. What was happening in his mind, he kept to himself all too well.
The FBI did "forget," but he may well have bullshitted his way out of that interview, too.
He had ten guns. Why did he choose the AR-15? We all know why.
 
I would love to know what law would have stopped that kid from shooting up the school.
Well there was one law back during Jimmy Carters regime, and that was to allow insane people back into society. That right there started the closing of asylums that would of kept people who want to hurt themselves and others.

Jimmy Carter: Mental Health Systems Legislation Message to the Congress Transmitting the Proposed Legislation.
I am today submitting to Congress the Mental Health Systems Act. This proposed legislation establishes a new partnership between the federal government and the states in the planning 'and provision of mental health services. It seeks to assure that the chronically mentally ill no longer face the cruel alternative of unnecessary institutionalization or inadequate care in the community.
When these sick people were allowed out of the institution, soon there were razor blades in apples and needles in candy bars at Halloween. And the rest is history....Liberal compassion ends up killing people...
Mental health laws wouldnt have stopped this guy either. He was apparently OKd by the FBI (or did they just forget?) AND the state welfare office. The childrens office deemed him perfectly sane.
Yesterday for President Day, Happy Birthday George and Abe, I decided to exercise my 2nd Amendment again, by purchasing and helping the gun and ammo manufacturers again. Once again I passed the FBI background checks and will be getting ready for the next uprising the libtards plan in an area near me. When libtards don't get their way, they burn and assault women, but not men who can protect themselves.



fuzil%20steyr77.jpg



 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top