Re: Colorado shooting at batman premire
One could argue that on balance we tend to be more reactive as a people than proactive, and that much of our national/state/local decision making has not been up to the task. In my view it seems to be more of a non-stop rugby scrum than anything else.
Greg, I would suggest that your thoughtful call for clear and thorough thinking could also be extended to include consideration of how we structure and guide our analysis and decision making. Although I feel that now is the time for compassionate support for those so brutally harmed, it will soon be upon us to offer wisdom and foresight in the shadow of this heart wrenching tragedy.
Last year I read “The Watchman’s Rattle” by Rebecca Costa. It has been informative in contrasting the complexity of our society’s problems with the toolkit we normally use to solve those problems. The book, in a nutshell, illustrates that as our problems and issues have become more and more complex, we have not really stepped up, as a society, in revising our problem solving approach, either reactively or proactively. Costa posits that complexity has evolved much faster than our problem solving ability. We tend to fall back on what is easy, familiar, and perhaps satisfying in the moment: taking names, laying blame, kicking ass. Bandaids. More often than not, when attempting to definitively solve more complex issues, this approach does not lead to a better future.
I am certain that my thinking, and powers of persuasion, are not up to the level needed to solve the kinds of issues inherent in the Aurora tragedy. I am, however, aware that much more is needed than we typically deliver.
The question of whether or not to limit our liberties in order to attempt to prevent inexplicable and unpredictable acts is certainly valid. It is probable that agreeing to limit liberties will not prevent all tragedies. How to agree on what level of tragedy is acceptable? At what point does the limitation of liberty become the tragedy? This point differs widely from one group to another.
My wife and I had a long discussion about this. My conclusion was a simple analogy. There are sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. Where there are no sheepdogs, the wolves have free rein. So, I vote for more sheepdogs. An informed, talented, capable population is a better bet than hoping that the bad guys will heed the law and not take advantage or our good nature. Godspeed in defining what ‘informed, talented, and capable’ mean to everyone’s satisfaction. And there you have it. I know it is more complex than this, yet I, unable to solve the complexity of it, arrive at a simplified analogy that makes me feel safer. Frankly I don’t have sufficient foresight to know that this is the best long-term solution. Meanwhile, during the non-stop rugby scrum, it makes sense to me.
Thinking of Cormac McCarthy’s novels, and life in general, I am reminded that good and evil are ever present. The good should have the option to do their best, without undue limitation; evil will invariably, inexplicably, attempt its worst.
My apologies for the ramble...had I taken more time this would have been much shorter and to the point.
One could argue that on balance we tend to be more reactive as a people than proactive, and that much of our national/state/local decision making has not been up to the task. In my view it seems to be more of a non-stop rugby scrum than anything else.
Greg, I would suggest that your thoughtful call for clear and thorough thinking could also be extended to include consideration of how we structure and guide our analysis and decision making. Although I feel that now is the time for compassionate support for those so brutally harmed, it will soon be upon us to offer wisdom and foresight in the shadow of this heart wrenching tragedy.
Last year I read “The Watchman’s Rattle” by Rebecca Costa. It has been informative in contrasting the complexity of our society’s problems with the toolkit we normally use to solve those problems. The book, in a nutshell, illustrates that as our problems and issues have become more and more complex, we have not really stepped up, as a society, in revising our problem solving approach, either reactively or proactively. Costa posits that complexity has evolved much faster than our problem solving ability. We tend to fall back on what is easy, familiar, and perhaps satisfying in the moment: taking names, laying blame, kicking ass. Bandaids. More often than not, when attempting to definitively solve more complex issues, this approach does not lead to a better future.
I am certain that my thinking, and powers of persuasion, are not up to the level needed to solve the kinds of issues inherent in the Aurora tragedy. I am, however, aware that much more is needed than we typically deliver.
The question of whether or not to limit our liberties in order to attempt to prevent inexplicable and unpredictable acts is certainly valid. It is probable that agreeing to limit liberties will not prevent all tragedies. How to agree on what level of tragedy is acceptable? At what point does the limitation of liberty become the tragedy? This point differs widely from one group to another.
My wife and I had a long discussion about this. My conclusion was a simple analogy. There are sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. Where there are no sheepdogs, the wolves have free rein. So, I vote for more sheepdogs. An informed, talented, capable population is a better bet than hoping that the bad guys will heed the law and not take advantage or our good nature. Godspeed in defining what ‘informed, talented, and capable’ mean to everyone’s satisfaction. And there you have it. I know it is more complex than this, yet I, unable to solve the complexity of it, arrive at a simplified analogy that makes me feel safer. Frankly I don’t have sufficient foresight to know that this is the best long-term solution. Meanwhile, during the non-stop rugby scrum, it makes sense to me.
Thinking of Cormac McCarthy’s novels, and life in general, I am reminded that good and evil are ever present. The good should have the option to do their best, without undue limitation; evil will invariably, inexplicably, attempt its worst.
My apologies for the ramble...had I taken more time this would have been much shorter and to the point.
