Originally Posted by Galen

I have dealt with the Lost, GI, Silent, Generation X and the Millenials and they have one redeeming quality that the Boomers completely lack. When they made mistakes they could admit to the mistake, try to fix it and then not repeat it. It is this one thing that allows me to forgive much.

The Boomers can't seem to do this. They will do the same thing over an over again in the hope that it will work this time, if only they believe hard enough. This is the reason the US has such a gigantic debt that will sink us. Indeed, they are making the same mistakes that LBJ did and have managed to create a surveillance system that Nixon couldn't dreamed up in his wildest wet dream. Both of the major political parties have participated in this.

Telling me to "get used to it" shows that you lack this very quality that I respected in these people. I am used to it and I am not looking forward to watching Millies face the consequences of Boomer insanity for the simple mistake of being born after the Boomers.

I agree 100% with this post.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

This is an argument based upon logic and your own personal views, not on either the ext of the amendment or on history. The text reads, "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." NOT, "Self-defense being the foundation of liberty, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The militia was a traditional institution in the colonies as it was in England and performed the tasks I mentioned. It was regarded as an alternative to a standing army, which the text of the Constitution effectively forbade by stating that no appropriation for an army could be for a period longer than two years. That provision is still in effect, but, as noted earlier, we now rely on professional police forces and armies to perform the tasks they looked to the militia to perform.....

This is not an anti-US Govt rant on my part; Only an observation:

Today's Police and Army were British Soldiers during the Am Rev Crisis. The US Constitution protects US Citizens from abuse by Govt. Previously that Govt. was British; Now it is American.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

.... And sadly, it doesn't look to me as if Xers are going to have much to offer to get us out of the mess we are in, largely because of their distrust of institutions.

Not distrust, only a belief that they are dysfunctional. What good is an Institution, or Legislation/Regulation for that matter, if it does not work properly? They must operate well on a fundamental basis, not only now, but for future generations(Posterity). Temporarily "papering-over" the dysfunction only leads to further problems down the road. Simple and Effective is the way to go IMO. Functional, Sustainable, Adaptable, Etc. What we have currently is Complex and Defective.

These Issues concerning Policy and Institutional Functionality are complicated and need alot of intellegent and diverse Opinions to solve IMO. While passionate POVs are not to be excluded, I believe they are problematic in trying to solve these Issues due to the "End justifying the Means" Mentality.

PoC67

PS: Sorry for the Tangent; Now back to "Guns & Swords" already in progress.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

1960-1965 Generation Jones

Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Barack Obama all fall in that Cohort. IMO there is a distinct difference in that they are less idealistic than The Boom and more preachy than Gen X.

You're right. I think it probably extends back to 1957, to 1964.

There is a distinct difference between Flower Children(1967 Monterrey Pop Festival) and Hippies(1969 Woodstock). Somewhere in this timeperiod, passive sit-ins became active protests.

The more activist period began in April 1967, when the first great anti-war march happened, led by Dr. King. The flower children continued along with it, and to some extent continue today.

Originally Posted by Galen

I have dealt with the Lost, GI, Silent, Generation X and the Millenials and they have one redeeming quality that the Boomers completely lack. When they made mistakes they could admit to the mistake, try to fix it and then not repeat it. It is this one thing that allows me to forgive much.

The Gis couldn't seem to admit their mistake in Vietnam and correct it. You mention LBJ below; good. I think it's probably a universal human failing. Maybe we Boomers are worse. BUt all humans are capable of learning. That doesn't mean they will agree with you.

The Boomers can't seem to do this. They will do the same thing over an over again in the hope that it will work this time, if only they believe hard enough. This is the reason the US has such a gigantic debt that will sink us. Indeed, they are making the same mistakes that LBJ did and have managed to create a surveillance system that Nixon couldn't dreamed up in his wildest wet dream. Both of the major political parties have participated in this.

The debt was started and largely created by Ronald Reagan, GI gen. Boomer Clinton did far more than anyone else to fix it. W. Bush screwed it up. It depends on which Boomer you are talking about.

Socialism that you disagree with is not a Boomer creation. In fact Boomers were the first generation to move more in an individualist direction since socialism arrived.

Telling me to "get used to it" shows that you lack this very quality that I respected in these people. I am used to it and I am not looking forward to watching Millies face the consequences of Boomer insanity for the simple mistake of being born after the Boomers.

Like I said, all generations need to fix what came before. That's why they are here. Each generation is a departure from the last one.

Boomers bear a strong critique right now, because they are at the age when many of them are in power.

Originally Posted by radind

I am a late Silent who agrees with you. We should only wage war when necessary for out national interests. The current so called 'wars' were not necessary and a terrible mistake.

I agree with you. I also think our domestic violence (gun obsession) is also a mistake.
Non-violence begins at home, I think.

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

However, Eric on the subject of guns and hunting is as obsessed as Adina was on the subject of Prohibition.

I would say persistent in advocating for what I value. Not an every day preoccupation.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

The more activist period began in April 1967, when the first great anti-war march happened, led by Dr. King. The flower children continued along with it, and to some extent continue today.

Thanks for the insight. I'll look into it and maybe pick your brain a bit w/a PM if you don't mind.

PoC67

PS: FWIW Eric, although I understand and agree w/the 2nd Amendment, I'm not into Guns either. Well maybe some Guns N Roses!

GnR "Civil War" w/Lyrics:
http://www.youtube.com/v/ALhwQKTRAgA?fs=1&hl=en_US

Interesting Lyrics IMO; Check 'em out!

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Bullshit. Wolves are predators. Top-of-the-food-chain-predators.

The only reason people don't sit firmly below them is our tools -- that is, our guns. And that's not even 100% sufficient. There are plenty of not-terribly-wild places in the world where wolves still, today prey on people. Not just livestock.
There's that California provincialism rearing its head again.

No, it's the point that you don't have to travel somewhere to be well informed. Wherever you are. Not that, if you don't travel, you are better off anyway in California. That's a whole other discussion. You are mixing up a lot of discussions here. NTTIAWWT

Humans can get along with wolves just fine these days. I am not an expert on that, but I know there are ways to manage a ranch or other rural establishment, live with wolves, and not need to shoot them. We humans need to learn to live with nature, and take care of our needs, but not dominate it.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Galen,

No one has been more critical of my fellow Boomers than I, but I think this is going too far. The permanent deficit was created by a GI, Ronald Reagan, and briefly eliminated by a Boomer, Bill Clinton. The current war in Afghanistan (which I also oppose) has been expanded and prolonged by an Xer, Barack Obama. And the current wars at least are on a far smaller scale than Vietnam. Neither LBJ, Nixon or Henry Kissinger ever admitted making a mistake. And sadly, it doesn't look to me as if Xers are going to have much to offer to get us out of the mess we are in, largely because of their distrust of institutions.

It was Robert McNamara, the Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam War time frame who admitted to having made a mistake in escalating Vietnam. We can't say for sure, but he might have done so just so he could clear his conscience before going to meet his maker, which he now has.

Originally Posted by Odin

Eric is acting like a Boomer stereotype. Quite annoying.

I'm acting like the nomad Harry Truman. I am telling the truth, and you just THINK it's annoying.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Thanks for the insight. I'll look into it and maybe pick your brain a bit w/a PM if you don't mind.

PoC67

PS: FWIW Eric, although I understand and agree w/the 2nd Amendment, I'm not into Guns either. Well maybe some Guns N Roses!

GnR "Civil War" w/Lyrics:
http://www.youtube.com/v/ALhwQKTRAgA?fs=1&hl=en_US

Interesting Lyrics IMO; Check 'em out!

That's good to know, I guess.
Active sit ins were first, actually, started by civil rights activists in 1960.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Why is everyone talking about wolves. Unless you live in Alaska or next to a national park, you will never encounter one while going about your daily business.
If you want to talk about natural predators, take a look at mountain lions or coyotes. Those suckers are attacking people and pets all the time, and rapidly encroaching on urban areas.

Huh. Coyotes are so tiny, I'd never really thought of them as a threat. Now cougars, on the other hand... you've got a point there. Then again, those seem to be more of a southern problem. Up here, there are wolves. And bears (though bears are more of dangerous, unpredictable neighbors, than so much predators). We've had bears walking along our back deck in full daylight on more than one occasion.

As for myself, I think immediately of wolves when I think of predators-on-people mainly because those are the only things I've ever been involved personally with. Not in national parks, either -- we're talking day-to-day stuff. Granted, not in North America. But still.... there's a reason so many classical children's stories feature wolves as the bad guys. They've got a long and rich history of fucking people up.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Humans can get along with wolves just fine these days.

Ah yes. With the ones we've spent tens of thousands of years breeding the wolf out of. We get along just fine (for the most part -- there are always exceptions) with those.

But with wild predators? Homo sap is just a relatively tricky food for them. Riskier to take than rabbit or deer, but easier to find. And in a pinch, food is food.

Humans "get along well" with polar bears, too. That is: we stay the hell away from them, and so long as we do, they don't kill and eat too many of us. Ditto for shark, tiger, cougar, and any other number of larger predators. To the extent that our range and theirs intersect, however, we most certainly do not 'get along'.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

That's good to know, I guess.
Active sit ins were first, actually, started by civil rights activists in 1960.

I'm aware of the History of Passive-Protest during the 1T-2T(Some-GIs, Mostly-Silents, Some early-Boom). I was not aware(specifically) when it became Active-Protest.

PoC67

PS: Passive-Protest, Active-Protest, Aggressive-Protest, to Violent-Protest. Where in the aforementioned does "Civil Disobedience" cease?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience

Thought I'd add these "No Pressure" commercials from UK 10:10.
http://www.1010global.org/

For those that haven't seen them, these were real commercials in the UK. Unbelievable that they didn't realize that Some(ie: Most) find these repulsive. The day that is accepted, Individuality is Dead.
http://www.youtube.com/v/sSTLDel-G9k?fs=1&hl=en_US

Originally Posted by Brian Beecher

It was Robert McNamara, the Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam War time frame who admitted to having made a mistake in escalating Vietnam. We can't say for sure, but he might have done so just so he could clear his conscience before going to meet his maker, which he now has.

Yes. He was the only senior LBJ or Nixon Administration official who ever did.

It is great to see the people of Tunisia awaken, as I predicted somebody would, at least at this time, with a great eclipse and conjunction recently.

It is sad that America falls ever deeper into deep somnolescence.

I know it is not possible now, because of this blindness having elected a reactionary congress, for anything to come out of this tragedy in Tucson. Perhaps some lowering of the volume of vitriol would be nice for a while. But Republican determination to pursue reactionary policies at all cost, even if civil in tone, is uncivil in substance. Right-wing America cannot expect to keep us backward and enslaved to big money, without trouble and/or abject decline. Of course, it has been years since anything has been done about gun control. And our mental health system apparently failed too.

I guess the thread about Sarah Palin has been taken off. That's fine with me. It's not really fair to blame her for the shootings in Tuscon. On the other hand, I think the lack of gun control is a major factor. That is the price we must pay for our tolerance of uncontrolled guns. That is the price for considering the possession of dangerous weapons as a primary or even THE primary civil right. That is the price for a culture of violence in many ways. We need to wake up from this culture of violence, and learn the ways of peace instead.

Sarah Palin did not cause this tragedy. There is no reason to assume that Loughner saw her "target" graphic, or her advice to reload. Even if he did, it is still the gunman's fault, primarily if not totally. But if these postures, or her video about a blood libel, does not ruin her chances to be president, then that is more proof that Americans have totally lost their way. This is obviously not the words of a lady who can lead a nation. I trust people realize this.

Contrast her speech with Obama's. The president asked us not to turn on one another, and use words that heal. He asked us to be the nation Christina would have wanted us to be. Palin instead used the occasion to push her right-wing Reagan philosophy. It was only the gunman's individual responsibility, she said, not a collective one. You guys should not attack me; that will only make the violence worse, she said. She was defending her conduct, not healing the nation. Her rhetoric and imagery contributed to the culture of violence, just as does that of the opponents of gun control. We need to move past that culture, someday, into a new day.

Right now it seems too late. Not only are we not turning our backs on violence sufficiently, but seem to approve of cutting welfare at a time when it is most needed. Many people have been out of work longer than 99 weeks, and yet congress did nothing to help them, and states are cutting budgets. We need to raise some taxes. The mania for never raising taxes is another one of our reactionary obsessions. Taxes and government are not the answer to everything. But the wealthy are doing fine in this country now. They can pay a bit more in taxes to support the people that they laid off. Why don't Americans understand this?

Boy, we are asleep. Can we wake up in time? Will we be slaves to outdated simple answers indefinitely?

I am beginning to believe that this "gun hunt" is going to end up as the Iraqi quagmire of the left.

In Japan there was a tradition known as "sword hunts" where new rulers after conquering the land would go around rounding up swords in order to prevent anyone from doing the same to him. Rounding up weapons is a common way for rulers to obtain a monopoly on violence. The British did the same thing to the American colonists. Hence the inclusion of the 2nd amendment.

Probably the most important "sword hunt" was the one after the Meiji Revolution. It was not just a matter of the new government preventing people revolting against them. It was also because they had decided to reform Japan, destroy the samurai class and modernize. Hence the post Meiji Revolution "sword hunt" had the connotations of an attack on the entire samurai culture especially due to the attachment that samurai had to their swords. It was part of their identity of who they were. It was highly successful - the samurai and the entire Japanese feudal system was eradicated. However as a result of the sword hunt and other similar schemes, the samurai revolted leading to a second civil war as Japan was trying to recover from its first one. The biggest battle, the Satsuma Rebellion led to over 20,000 dead and caused irreparable fractures in the alliance which brought down the Shogunate as the samurai who led the rebellion, Saigo Takamori, was one of the main leaders of the alliance. Even at the time Saigo was seen as a tragic romantic hero, dying to defend his beliefs and the samurai tradition and was pardoned of all crimes soon after dying in battle. He was dubbed "The last true samurai".

The point is, something many on the left do not understand, is that to many on the right, guns is part of who they are. It is part of their culture, part of their tradition.

Part of the mistakes the right made with Iraq was a chief motive of the war was to "reform" the Muslims. They wanted to make the Iraqis like them - partly to neuter a perceived threat, partly to obtain control, but also partly for what was believed to be the Iraqis own good. Part of the aim was to make Iraqis "one of us" and then use them as an example to get the rest of the Muslim world to become "one of us". One could argue that Iraqi culture and Muslim culture is 'barbaric' or 'savage' but it led to the American war leaders grossly misunderstanding how the Iraqi people would react and also I suspect led to feelings of humiliation. Also amongst the wider Muslim world they could see it for what it was an attack on their culture and identity.

The left is making this exact same mistake. Hence all the comments about how barbaric and savage the right is. Even if it is correct, it doesn't matter. Because if a "gun hunt" is implemented now it won't just be about public safety it will perceived as an attempt to change the entire culture and traditions and identity of the right. Reading the comments here by left wingers I am pretty sure I am right about this interpretation of what they are aiming at. Hence it is likely this particularly gun hunt will lead to the same reaction as led to the 26,000 dead in the Satsuma Rebellion.

Actually I doubt it will lead to an actual bitched battle and castle seiges. But the most likely effect will be a permanent and complete rupture between the right and the left, not based on economics but culture and identity. This "gun hunt" will not be perceived just as a threat to their civil liberties but a threat to the very identity of the right. Not to mention as an attempt to humiliate them by the left. In a way this will be the Culture wars of the 3T taken to its ultimate conclusion.

I don't think we really need to fear for the right though. My guess is this will backfire on the left in a serious way. Because the right will now have a cause to rally behind. They can feel oppressed and persecuted. Just like Iraq left America slinking away with its tail between its legs and led to even moderate Muslims turning to terrorists, this gun hunt will lead to the left doing the same thing. The reason why I say this is because I can see exactly the same inability to understand the culture you are trying to "reform", the same administrative incompetence, the same desire to "reform" them, the same fear and raw emotion, the same lack of understanding of how difficult the job would actually be.

A main weakness of the Tea Party is the lack of support from youth - social security and medicare ain't exactly riveting subjects. I can see a "gun hunt" perceived as an attempt to destroy the culture and traditions of the right, obtaining this support from the right wing youth including those in the military. Also those right-wing moderates not aligned with the Tea Party and also rural Democrats may end up joining with the Tea Party. This could potentially be a serious danger in the future. It makes me nervous.

To tell the truth I don't really understand how the left cannot understand the dangers involved here. It seems obvious to me. Then again it seemed obvious to me the likely bad reaction of Muslims to Iraq.

To add to the discussion on Boomers. Part of the problem here is that Boomers only think in black and white. When you think about the last two Crises they were solved in part by bashing someone else to death, literally. The classic Prophet, crash through and win or die in the attempt. One side won decisively and the other side lost. I think Boomers are a big contributor to why right and left seem to be as unable to understand each other as Americans and Iraqis. The *real* problem though is that neither side has the resources to decisively beat the other. Which means a resolution has to come from diplomatic understanding and negotiation. Which is impossible because Boomers can't see the other point of view. It's my way or the high way. Bob Butler's suggestion about people customizing their news and Galen's suggestion about them not being able to admit mistakes (thanks for calling me "perceptive" - I'm not sure I am actually, it depends on whether I get what is likely to happen right - not sure I want to be right...)


What this means is the most likely path into the future is both sides of Boomers basically bashing each other in a war of attrition until they get old enough they have to resign from leadership positions. Eventually Nomads will take on those leadership positions and they will either (1) fix up the mess Boomers left behind or (2) be really bitter and become bad Nomad leaders. This will depend on just how bad a mess it really is. How long will it take before Boomers get old enough they will largely be out of leadership positions? It is probably at around the same time that the demographic crisis reaches its peak.

Speaking of other nations entering Awakenings: On NPR there was an interview with some Iranian television folks who sound so much like young adult Adaptives that it was ridiculous. Iran should be Awakening within the next few years if not already. They described that their generation was a generation that grew up during the war and is angry with the Islamic Republic for what they've done to the nation since then. However these guys have dealt with by creating a program much like the Daily Show, making fun of all parties--even American influence, which has garnered them respect in Iran.

Who was it that said that Adaptives were the best comedians, because their humor was so good-natured and treated everyone equally or something like that?

Anyway, Iran looks well poised for an Awakening. So does Brazil, which has now completely turned around its Inflation Crisis by creating a new currency.

~Chas'88

I would not call it a Left-Right thing, but an Urban-Rural thing, as my exchanges with Eric have made quite clear, since we are both left-wingers.

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Speaking of other nations entering Awakenings: On NPR there was an interview with some Iranian television folks who sound so much like young adult Adaptives that it was ridiculous. Iran should be Awakening within the next few years if not already. They described that their generation was a generation that grew up during the war and is angry with the Islamic Republic for what they've done to the nation since then. However these guys have dealt with by creating a program much like the Daily Show, making fun of all parties--even American influence, which has garnered them respect in Iran.

Who was it that said that Adaptives were the best comedians, because their humor was so good-natured and treated everyone equally or something like that?

Anyway, Iran looks well poised for an Awakening. So does Brazil, which has now completely turned around its Inflation Crisis by creating a new currency.

~Chas'88

Former Brazilian president Lula reminds me of JFK, a charismatic late 1T Civic leader.

In fact, the kind of New Deal democracy that ruled the US in mid-century is now gaining ground all over Latin America, except, ironically, Mexico, where it began in the first place.

To AnnieZob I would say that the left-right chasm could not possibly be larger than it is now. The Left is long since through making any real efforts on gun control. The idea that they are is a convenient right-wing straw man. Actually the same is true about practically every Left position at this point.

Originally Posted by AnneZob

I am beginning to believe that this "gun hunt" is going to end up as the Iraqi quagmire of the left.

What 'gun hunt'?

Many think Al Gore lost to GW Bush because he pushed gun control. There were a few states he just barely lost where his pro gun control stance likely lost it for him. Since that time the Democratic national party has not pushed gun control at the national level. The Republicans still use scare tactics. They say the Democrats are pro gun control and try to cause as much fear and anger as possible, but there are no active gun control pushes, and certainly no plans for a gun hunt. After years of gun control in the cities resulting in a culture of guns in the cities, I for one would like to see alternate policies pursued for a while.

The gun rights people are, so far as I know, on the offensive. The Second Amendment has been recognized as an individual right. Strict gun bans such as those in Washington DC and Chicago are being rolled back. Thus far, the increased ownership of guns by the law abiding has not resulted in the end of civilization as we know it. Meanwhile, last I knew, concealed carry laws were spreading in the more rural western states. Again, no end of civilization as we know it.

Anne, there is a lot of emotion involved in this issue. I concur that an attempt by the cities to disarm the country would be problematic. However, it is not on the horizon at this time. This is one of the culture war issues that has been pretty much settled for our time, but some people won't let go. They keep agitating, building up hatred and fear, to no purpose and great harm.

There is no more going to be a gun hunt in the time frame of this crisis than there will be an invasion of the US mainland by the Chinese. I have my disagreements with the Conservatives on many issues, but much of the time they are concerned about realistic problems. It's when they travel into tin foil hat territory that I wonder.

Originally Posted by AnneZob

I am beginning to believe that this "gun hunt" is going to end up as the Iraqi quagmire of the left.

I concur with Bob Butler -- what gun hunt? What I see being talked about now is to reinstate a ban on sale of semi-automatics that are capable of firing 30 rounds in a few seconds. This ban was in place until 2004. If the ban had been in place, the Tuscon shooter would have ran out of ammo much sooner and a few more lives would have been spared. However, this is a very modest gun control step and my guess is that it won't go anywhere.

To add to the discussion on Boomers. Part of the problem here is that Boomers only think in black and white. When you think about the last two Crises they were solved in part by bashing someone else to death, literally. The classic Prophet, crash through and win or die in the attempt. One side won decisively and the other side lost. I think Boomers are a big contributor to why right and left seem to be as unable to understand each other as Americans and Iraqis. The *real* problem though is that neither side has the resources to decisively beat the other. Which means a resolution has to come from diplomatic understanding and negotiation. Which is impossible because Boomers can't see the other point of view.

It's my way or the high way. Bob Butler's suggestion about people customizing their news and Galen's suggestion about them not being able to admit mistakes (thanks for calling me "perceptive" - I'm not sure I am actually, it depends on whether I get what is likely to happen right - not sure I want to be right...)

Not all Boomers think just in Black and White. You just cited one -- Bob Butler.

Some Xers are pretty strident, too. Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck come to mind. On the left, there is Rachel Maddow.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

Not all Boomers think just in Black and White. You just cited one -- Bob Butler.

Some Xers are pretty strident, too. Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck come to mind. On the left, there is Rachel Maddow.

I'm not sure unprincipled fanatics will be better than principled ones. Then again, it seems to me that Sarah and Glenn are buying into the Red culture as much as any Boomer.

Originally Posted by AnneZob

I am beginning to believe that this "gun hunt" is going to end up as the Iraqi quagmire of the left.

The point is, something many on the left do not understand, is that to many on the right, guns is part of who they are. It is part of their culture, part of their tradition.

Part of the mistakes the right made with Iraq was a chief motive of the war was to "reform" the Muslims. They wanted to make the Iraqis like them - partly to neuter a perceived threat, partly to obtain control, but also partly for what was believed to be the Iraqis own good. Part of the aim was to make Iraqis "one of us" and then use them as an example to get the rest of the Muslim world to become "one of us". One could argue that Iraqi culture and Muslim culture is 'barbaric' or 'savage' but it led to the American war leaders grossly misunderstanding how the Iraqi people would react and also I suspect led to feelings of humiliation. Also amongst the wider Muslim world they could see it for what it was an attack on their culture and identity.

The left is making this exact same mistake. Hence all the comments about how barbaric and savage the right is. Even if it is correct, it doesn't matter. Because if a "gun hunt" is implemented now it won't just be about public safety it will perceived as an attempt to change the entire culture and traditions and identity of the right. Reading the comments here by left wingers I am pretty sure I am right about this interpretation of what they are aiming at. Hence it is likely this particularly gun hunt will lead to the same reaction as led to the 26,000 dead in the Satsuma Rebellion.

Actually I doubt it will lead to an actual bitched battle and castle seiges. But the most likely effect will be a permanent and complete rupture between the right and the left, not based on economics but culture and identity. This "gun hunt" will not be perceived just as a threat to their civil liberties but a threat to the very identity of the right. Not to mention as an attempt to humiliate them by the left. In a way this will be the Culture wars of the 3T taken to its ultimate conclusion.

I don't think we really need to fear for the right though. My guess is this will backfire on the left in a serious way. Because the right will now have a cause to rally behind. They can feel oppressed and persecuted. Just like Iraq left America slinking away with its tail between its legs and led to even moderate Muslims turning to terrorists, this gun hunt will lead to the left doing the same thing. The reason why I say this is because I can see exactly the same inability to understand the culture you are trying to "reform", the same administrative incompetence, the same desire to "reform" them, the same fear and raw emotion, the same lack of understanding of how difficult the job would actually be.

If the right begins to stockpile weapons, then you could see the government go after them, and you could see more Wacos. Whether that would lead to a civil war is another question.

I doubt the Left is going to mount a campaign to eliminate guns by force. There may be a campaign to persuade people to change to a non-violent culture. There doesn't seem to be such a serious campaign now. But your strange defense of gun culture as "part of who we are" is startling. The question then, if you are right, is whether America can ever change to become a sane society, and find its identity elsewhere. I think that it can; I don't see why not. It may take a while for Americans to find a way.

Gun control itself is not something the right should fear, and if it does, then that is a problem. But even that is not going to happen at the moment; it will be a few years before anything can be done.

Personally, I would like to see a ban on all guns, and a repeal of the 2nd Amendment. Noone here has convinced me that there is a good reason for anyone to have guns, though I welcome the attempts. It seems that the states that have lax guns laws, which are mostly rural, have higher rates of gun deaths. So rifles used for hunting also make murder quite easier, according to the stats.

Vermont seems to be a good example. A very liberal state in other ways, it has lax guns laws. While its gun death rate is low compared to the south and west, it is higher than in other New England states.

But a ban on guns would have to be something the majority of the American people want, and the congress passes and the Supreme Court unholds. There won't be a gun hunt mounted by the Left OR the Right until it is the government enforcing the law. Illegal gun hunts will not happen.

Odin's point is correct, and I've made it as well, that some on the Left are pro-gun or anti-gun control, often because they favor revolution at least in some circumstances. In the 60s the revolutionary Black Panther Party, among many activities, was quite vocal in favor of their right to have guns. Whether they were right or not, the government went after them with the same vengeance that they went after the compound in Waco.

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Speaking of other nations entering Awakenings: On NPR there was an interview with some Iranian television folks who sound so much like young adult Adaptives that it was ridiculous. Iran should be Awakening within the next few years if not already. They described that their generation was a generation that grew up during the war and is angry with the Islamic Republic for what they've done to the nation since then. However these guys have dealt with by creating a program much like the Daily Show, making fun of all parties--even American influence, which has garnered them respect in Iran.

Who was it that said that Adaptives were the best comedians, because their humor was so good-natured and treated everyone equally or something like that?

Anyway, Iran looks well poised for an Awakening. So does Brazil, which has now completely turned around its Inflation Crisis by creating a new currency.

~Chas'88

I'm not sure what's happening in Tunisia or Iran today is an Awakening. If the issues are mainly secular, a revolution can also be a 4T.