HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » erronis » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: Green Mountains
Home country: US
Member since: Tue Feb 5, 2013, 04:27 PM
Number of posts: 11,426

Journal Archives

First it seemed like just random acts of violence

I first penned this after Sandy Hook but think has some relevance to the political and social situation that the recent "election" has brought upon us.

First it seemed like just random acts of violence no obvious connection except for perhaps some mental instability and the types of weapons used.

Although this had happened to some level in the past in this country, there seemed to be an increase in frequency and intensity of the violence.

Predictably there was a general sense that something needed to be done; whether treating the possible mental illnesses or limiting access to the weaponry. A political will was forming to perhaps address this, altho the money was on the other side.

The media was finding this problem to be another good lead issue to improve audience ratings and advertising revenues. Apparently random acts of terror are more affecting than the day-to-day threats.

Paid-for shills on K Street and sitting in the Capitol; bloodthirsty and greedy manufacturers; willfully ignorant supporters.

Industries and their trade groups (weaponry, media, mental services) had a vested interest in how this situation would be handled. Some members of the government were influenced by the commercial organizations.

The populace became more and more polarized about how to handle this. Typical progressive/conservative grounds.

Non-action was the likely outcome common answer/inertia.

The adherents of the viewpoint that the choice of weaponry is solely their own started to believe that the government would try to confiscate or limit their rights.

- Hunting clubs
- Gated communities
- Private security
- Guerilla tactics
- Non-violence confrontations
- Local police, Army/NG unable to deal with homegrown insurgency
- Police/military may have bonds to the weaponry activists
- Households becoming safe-havens in name only. No policing possible given number of attacks
- One border country closes due to large-scale immigration attempts not clear how long they can last.
- Other border country started this weaponization and terror earlier lessons learned. (I'm not sure what I meant.)

Go to Page: 1