Jeff Thomas
New member
I know some folks get irritated with these 'read this' threads. But really, ... you should read this 
:
http://www.interaccess.com/ihpnet/notone
Titled: 'Not Even One: Report from The Carter Center of Emory University Consultation on the Crisis of Children and Firearms', I found it while looking for web information on one of the groups that duped those CO high school kids into going to Washington DC today. The two groups responsible were Handgun Control, Inc. (no surprise) and SAFE (Sane Alternatives to the Firearms Epidemic), a political action group formed in the aftermath of the Columbine tragedy.
If you take the time to read this entire piece (and, it is long), I think you will find it absolutely chilling. I don't usually use such terms, and I'm sure the participants would not see their actions in such a light, but IMHO this is essentially an effort to subvert the U.S. Constitution. Of course, they view the 'individual rights' interpretation of the 2nd Amendment as a "myth".
Here are some of the more interesting quotes from this report of 5 years ago:
"Our gathering was framed around a modest focus on:
1- children, not all people;
2- firearms, not all violence;
3- handguns, not all firearms;
4- those initiatives that could make an urgent and significant
impact (the next five to ten years);
5- those things we could begin working on immediately."
and,
"We find that when we look at things through the eyes of children we get the question right and usually the answer follows." - the small is beautiful approach of true stargazers.
and,
"The central driving conclusion of our gathering was the conviction that not one gun death of a child can be acceptable. Not even one." - which naturally and logically translates into being totally apathetic about how many other deaths they may cause by their foolish policy decisions.
and,
"We found ourselves describing both an agenda and a movement. The general framework of our strategy flows into four basic categories, detailed in chapter three of this report:
- legislation that needs to be passed,
- research that must be done (and funded),
- a movement that must be built."
and,
"We are attracted to the concept of a flat tax on handguns high enough to make the purchase decision less casual and to provide a flow of revenue for research, trauma centers and community initiatives that are necessary. We consider it very important to maintain the right of communities to try their own creative pro-child gun strategies. Thus we are concerned by state level preemption laws, which ineffect preempts (nullifies) local laws by the passage of a state law, pushed by cynical pro-gun interests afraid of creative municipal and county initiatives."
and,
"We strongly support the movement by some key foundations to provide support in this area. However, government resources are essential for the scope, scale and longevity of the research needed. Any serious legislative steps to protect children must include funding for the research necessary to evaluate and improve our efforts."
and,
"We must build a movement that is equal to task of changing the social climate. Movement building is as urgent as legislative and criminal justice interventions. The social climate cannot be changed as quickly as legislation can be passed. We know, however, that within our urgent time scale of five-to-ten years we have the tools and techniques to alter the role of guns in our society. Guns may be a deeper, more powerful cultural icon than cigarettes. We have barely begun to engage the task of changing guns from symbols of sexy power to symbols of stupid impotence. The tools of public education, mass media and community mobilization have only started to be employed."
and,
"The Public Health Approach
Perhaps the most influential among the frameworks for advocacy considered at the consultation was the public health approach, the movement to "reframe" the problem in terms of the impact of firearms violence on the public's health. Advocated persuasively
at the consultation by Mark Rosenberg of National Injury Prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Arthur Kellerman of Emory University s Center for Injury Control, this approach has captured the imagination of many concerned about firearm violence. Though it has only been within the past decade or so that experts have begun to look at the staggering human costs associated with this epidemic as an issue primarily of public health, this perspective has already demonstrated its usefulness." - foundation for the municipal gun manufacturer lawsuits we're seeing currently.
and,
"Many Americans see firearms as having at least some legitimate uses. Of course, a few have argued that the Constitution guarantees that each person can arm themselves if they choose. Such deeply-held myths will not be disposed of without careful and sensitive national debate over the appropriate relationship between the individual, the police, the community, and the state." - this part is certainly interesting.
and,
"Though the current situation of virtual lack of regulation might benefit most from the creation of a new, independent regulatory agency such as the FDA or the CPSC, a more realistic alternative would be to greatly expand the authority of the BATF (through legislation) to set and monitor safety standards for firearms. Most handguns, as well as all assault weapons, would likely fail to pass any such new criteria, and would thus be banned."
and,
"As the Advocacy Institute noted in a report prepared for the Joyce Foundation, 'Many and diverse individuals and organizations are poised to take up advocacy against gun violence, or to raise the epidemic of gun violence to the top of their advocacy priorities-- groups ranging from the Coalition for America's Children and the Children's Defense Fund to the NAACP, and the American Bar Association; the AFL-CIO; large and small retailers; mayors and law enforcement officials and their organizations; the American Public Health Association; the American Academy of Pediatrics; and Physicians for Social Responsibility.'" - I assure you, the list gets longer.
and,
"Broaden the list of people who can not legally have guns.
We see a particular opportunity in seeking legislative action to broaden the legal definition of kinds of people that should be excluded from purchasing handguns. This is not only a rational way to protect our children, but also makes smart legislative strategy. This approach has the advantage of highlighting the limited impact of current legislation while forcing pro-gun forces into awkward defense of spouse abusers, child-molesters and other politically difficult groups."
and,
"Common Space
A movement is more than meetings and speeches. The anti-tobacco movement teaches us that it is about common communication channels, interpersonal relationships and strategies built on trust. On a day-to-day basis, the gun safety movement will need safe common spaces in which to meet and plan. The tobacco movement used SCARC-net, a computer network, as an online committee room in which an enormous amount of hard planning and information- sharing was accomplished. The Advocacy Institute is laying the groundwork for what might be called "safety-net" to do the same thing for the child gun safety movement. This is potentially a powerful tool for us all." - I wonder where this is today?
and,
"Signs and Symbols
The Carter Center consultation spent time thinking through the ways in which the handgun has become a central and oppressive symbol of fear and danger in our society and how the symbol can be changed. Within ten years we expect to see, and will work to ensure, the handgun changed from a symbol of power to one of weakness. A cigarette once subliminally communicated sex; it now means "addict" and brings forth pity instead of desire. We will work toward the same transfer to happen with guns ("only the weak would want a gun"). This by itself does not rid the society of dangerous weapons. But it has an enormous amount to do with whether the weapons are carried casually on the streets, in the schools and in our homes."
_____________________________________________
Perhaps this stuff is old news to many of you. I suppose I was naive enough to not realize how cold and calculating these folks are. All the while probably believing they'll make America a better place. True believers who cannot see any downside to their actions and single-minded goal.
Preventing violence for kids is great and important. But, these people planned 5 years ago what is happening today. The destruction of the right to keep and bear arms, and all of the potential disasters stemming from that destruction.
All because they firmly believe preventing the death of one child is more important than any other consideration, apparently including increased crime and despotic government. I don't want to see another innocent child die. Not one. But I would not sacrifice many more American lives, or the future of our country to save that child. That may sound cold, but there are consequences to their actions, and those consequences are potentially catastrophic.
[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited July 16, 1999).]
:http://www.interaccess.com/ihpnet/notone
Titled: 'Not Even One: Report from The Carter Center of Emory University Consultation on the Crisis of Children and Firearms', I found it while looking for web information on one of the groups that duped those CO high school kids into going to Washington DC today. The two groups responsible were Handgun Control, Inc. (no surprise) and SAFE (Sane Alternatives to the Firearms Epidemic), a political action group formed in the aftermath of the Columbine tragedy.
If you take the time to read this entire piece (and, it is long), I think you will find it absolutely chilling. I don't usually use such terms, and I'm sure the participants would not see their actions in such a light, but IMHO this is essentially an effort to subvert the U.S. Constitution. Of course, they view the 'individual rights' interpretation of the 2nd Amendment as a "myth".
Here are some of the more interesting quotes from this report of 5 years ago:
"Our gathering was framed around a modest focus on:
1- children, not all people;
2- firearms, not all violence;
3- handguns, not all firearms;
4- those initiatives that could make an urgent and significant
impact (the next five to ten years);
5- those things we could begin working on immediately."
and,
"We find that when we look at things through the eyes of children we get the question right and usually the answer follows." - the small is beautiful approach of true stargazers.
and,
"The central driving conclusion of our gathering was the conviction that not one gun death of a child can be acceptable. Not even one." - which naturally and logically translates into being totally apathetic about how many other deaths they may cause by their foolish policy decisions.
and,
"We found ourselves describing both an agenda and a movement. The general framework of our strategy flows into four basic categories, detailed in chapter three of this report:
- legislation that needs to be passed,
- research that must be done (and funded),
- a movement that must be built."
and,
"We are attracted to the concept of a flat tax on handguns high enough to make the purchase decision less casual and to provide a flow of revenue for research, trauma centers and community initiatives that are necessary. We consider it very important to maintain the right of communities to try their own creative pro-child gun strategies. Thus we are concerned by state level preemption laws, which ineffect preempts (nullifies) local laws by the passage of a state law, pushed by cynical pro-gun interests afraid of creative municipal and county initiatives."
and,
"We strongly support the movement by some key foundations to provide support in this area. However, government resources are essential for the scope, scale and longevity of the research needed. Any serious legislative steps to protect children must include funding for the research necessary to evaluate and improve our efforts."
and,
"We must build a movement that is equal to task of changing the social climate. Movement building is as urgent as legislative and criminal justice interventions. The social climate cannot be changed as quickly as legislation can be passed. We know, however, that within our urgent time scale of five-to-ten years we have the tools and techniques to alter the role of guns in our society. Guns may be a deeper, more powerful cultural icon than cigarettes. We have barely begun to engage the task of changing guns from symbols of sexy power to symbols of stupid impotence. The tools of public education, mass media and community mobilization have only started to be employed."
and,
"The Public Health Approach
Perhaps the most influential among the frameworks for advocacy considered at the consultation was the public health approach, the movement to "reframe" the problem in terms of the impact of firearms violence on the public's health. Advocated persuasively
at the consultation by Mark Rosenberg of National Injury Prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Arthur Kellerman of Emory University s Center for Injury Control, this approach has captured the imagination of many concerned about firearm violence. Though it has only been within the past decade or so that experts have begun to look at the staggering human costs associated with this epidemic as an issue primarily of public health, this perspective has already demonstrated its usefulness." - foundation for the municipal gun manufacturer lawsuits we're seeing currently.
and,
"Many Americans see firearms as having at least some legitimate uses. Of course, a few have argued that the Constitution guarantees that each person can arm themselves if they choose. Such deeply-held myths will not be disposed of without careful and sensitive national debate over the appropriate relationship between the individual, the police, the community, and the state." - this part is certainly interesting.
and,
"Though the current situation of virtual lack of regulation might benefit most from the creation of a new, independent regulatory agency such as the FDA or the CPSC, a more realistic alternative would be to greatly expand the authority of the BATF (through legislation) to set and monitor safety standards for firearms. Most handguns, as well as all assault weapons, would likely fail to pass any such new criteria, and would thus be banned."
and,
"As the Advocacy Institute noted in a report prepared for the Joyce Foundation, 'Many and diverse individuals and organizations are poised to take up advocacy against gun violence, or to raise the epidemic of gun violence to the top of their advocacy priorities-- groups ranging from the Coalition for America's Children and the Children's Defense Fund to the NAACP, and the American Bar Association; the AFL-CIO; large and small retailers; mayors and law enforcement officials and their organizations; the American Public Health Association; the American Academy of Pediatrics; and Physicians for Social Responsibility.'" - I assure you, the list gets longer.
and,
"Broaden the list of people who can not legally have guns.
We see a particular opportunity in seeking legislative action to broaden the legal definition of kinds of people that should be excluded from purchasing handguns. This is not only a rational way to protect our children, but also makes smart legislative strategy. This approach has the advantage of highlighting the limited impact of current legislation while forcing pro-gun forces into awkward defense of spouse abusers, child-molesters and other politically difficult groups."
and,
"Common Space
A movement is more than meetings and speeches. The anti-tobacco movement teaches us that it is about common communication channels, interpersonal relationships and strategies built on trust. On a day-to-day basis, the gun safety movement will need safe common spaces in which to meet and plan. The tobacco movement used SCARC-net, a computer network, as an online committee room in which an enormous amount of hard planning and information- sharing was accomplished. The Advocacy Institute is laying the groundwork for what might be called "safety-net" to do the same thing for the child gun safety movement. This is potentially a powerful tool for us all." - I wonder where this is today?
and,
"Signs and Symbols
The Carter Center consultation spent time thinking through the ways in which the handgun has become a central and oppressive symbol of fear and danger in our society and how the symbol can be changed. Within ten years we expect to see, and will work to ensure, the handgun changed from a symbol of power to one of weakness. A cigarette once subliminally communicated sex; it now means "addict" and brings forth pity instead of desire. We will work toward the same transfer to happen with guns ("only the weak would want a gun"). This by itself does not rid the society of dangerous weapons. But it has an enormous amount to do with whether the weapons are carried casually on the streets, in the schools and in our homes."
_____________________________________________
Perhaps this stuff is old news to many of you. I suppose I was naive enough to not realize how cold and calculating these folks are. All the while probably believing they'll make America a better place. True believers who cannot see any downside to their actions and single-minded goal.
Preventing violence for kids is great and important. But, these people planned 5 years ago what is happening today. The destruction of the right to keep and bear arms, and all of the potential disasters stemming from that destruction.
All because they firmly believe preventing the death of one child is more important than any other consideration, apparently including increased crime and despotic government. I don't want to see another innocent child die. Not one. But I would not sacrifice many more American lives, or the future of our country to save that child. That may sound cold, but there are consequences to their actions, and those consequences are potentially catastrophic.
[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited July 16, 1999).]