hi dig,
i fear there is no short way from A to B in terms of reducing gun violence - as a consequence of the vast number of guns in the US. reducing the number of guns in circulation will take decades. the vast majority of owners are surely not going to relinquish what they already have.
perhaps one can limit the problem by requiring a certificate of mental health prior to purchase - at least to make access by new users a little harder. but that wouldn't have stopped sandy hook, say.
even in a country like france which has strict controls, isisers seem to be able to get hold of guns.
so basically, i think there's no stopping terrorists in the US by restricting access to guns.
but that doesn't mean starting the process of limiting access to guns isn't worthwhile.
set aside the gun violence issue for a second.
obama seems quite determined to ignore the issues with islam which many other countries are experiencing. i have watched a whole bunch of UK debates with non-violent moslems and it seems clear that violence is not the main event. the desire to spread/impose sharia on society is the central aim. it is a goal shared by many "moderate" moslems and jihadists. hence the soft sympathy for isis amongst a large slice of mainstream believers as a means to an end.
if we want to oppose that idea, we have to explain why a different one is better. i think we must rejustify secular law, remember why it is that western societies are stable etc. provide a different vision for young moslems to cleave to. social media can also be our support in spreading a more peaceful gospel.
another problem is saudi finance. but that's a different issue.
| 