Bob Costas just did an anti-gun editorial during half time of Sunday Night Football

[Eleanors38]

358. I sympathize with your concerns about violence...

Gandhi referenced the need to act in self-defense, in his case through the highest level of ahimsa. He said one should do all possible to prevent attacks on one's self, family, home, property and religion without harming the attacker, even to the point of giving up one's life.

He also recognized that most people do not follow this ahimsa, but that should not relieve one of the responsibility of SD. In this instance, deadly violence was and is an obligation to stop attacks.

Perhaps the first place to start a discussion is to delineate between self-defense and a "culture of violence," whatever that is.

A hard truth we don't wish to face is that violent crime is committed largely by repeat felons, not by someone stewing in a broth of resentment and finding its outlet in a schoolyard massacre. Many here refuse to deal with this delineation, perhaps because of racial overtones.

Non-violence vs vulgar pacifism?
Machinegun crime on T.V. vs the rarest reality?
Social policy vs history-repeating prohibitionism?
Gun-owners as citizens vs the "hated other?"

I've this hugely ill-liberal debate here. I'm open to suggestions.

P.S. I personally favor a big campaign to rehabilitate the image of the 80-90 million gun owning fellow Americans. We would then find out what really drives some in the gun-control debate.

Thanks for the discussion.