No headline

The gun debate is, once again, a hot topic, returned to expose myopia, parade ignorance across social media and op-ed pieces like regimentally marched balloons, one after another, a procession of predictable comments and elicited responses. This us-versus-them mentality, no doubt exacerbated by partisan identification and binary thinking — either of which can be wielded with scripted, platitudinous ease — effectively closes the door on collaborative solution-finding.

Of course, compromise is a threat in and of itself.

Any concession on the part of gun supporters is, to them, an unmitigated defeat, no matter how reasonable. That said, upholding the status quo equates to failure on the part of gun reform advocates, many of whom sincerely believe banning semi-automatic weapons and bump stocks will all but eradicate violent crime. Hence the pickle, floating futilely in its juices, we find ourselves in.

I propose we recognize each issue as multifaceted, that we don’t default to oppositional gridlock but entertain myriad possibilities, some of which will challenge currently held beliefs. There are steps we can take to simultaneously honor freedom to own guns and freedom to feel safe; the trick is locating the fulcrum, balancing both concerns harmoniously on the razor-thin tip. Sure, it will waver and dip, struggle to level out. But, provided well-reasoned argument, an adjustment here or there, it will settle into place. In the end, we will all be better for it.

BRET JOHNSON

Sagle