When people start identifying those who are their neighbors as "the enemy", we've already got the foundations of violence.

The mass murder of children inspired a lot more than a shrug. Some of the responses, nationally, have been self-serving and some have been very emotional. The very emotional part, I get, because it's a horrible thing, but it doesn't help to act on those responses before we can think. Extreme hyperbole (is that redundant?) only inflames and divides people. The possibility of agreeing on any action at all therefore diminishes, and the people whose reactions are less extreme become burned out by all the hollering at the antipodes, and they drift away until something else happens.

podrock recently posted a link to a JAMA article that demonstrates political pressure to suppress research concerning gun safety and circumstances surrounding firearms injuries. Can we all agree that this is unacceptable and counterproductive? Research isn't legislation, it's information. There are rules that govern how research is done. Any organization, or individual, that purports to protect the Second Amendment with gag orders that may violate, and definitely attack, the First doesn't deserve to claim status as a protector of the Bill of Rights.

In the case of doctors not being allowed to talk frankly to patients about gun safety and injuries, it is a violation of their First Amendment rights, as well as an unwarranted intrusion on the doctor/patient relationship, which is protected by law. The birth control advocates have been dealing with this kind of interference for a long time.

The gag orders must be removed, and the funding restored, so we may have public health information to assist in our decision making. If anyone has concerns that research may be politically motivated (which *ahem* never happens), or that any of the researchers may have conflicts of interest, scientific research procedures have protocols to deal with that. Surely there will be watchdogs enough to make sure these are the most objective studies in the history of Western medicine.

If we can all agree on this one thing, then we can begin to negotiate on other things as well, especially with the new information we'll have.

There's not much I'm certain of, but as the granddaughter, niece and cousin of successful local politicians, I'll tell you something you can take to the bank: When we attack people, instead of ideas and actions, we will achieve nothing but division. If division is already there, it will widen. If anyone wants to claim the high ground and gain supporters, especially in what is essentially a polarized political struggle, making common cause with people in the opposition on certain basic ideas we have in common is the only way to achieve anything real.

It's a long haul and hard work. The results are worth it, because they stick.