Paradigms and the gun debate. I think I notice something that prevents any mutual understanding

[upaloopa]

between the various sides of the gun debate.
As Steven Covey said in his book, we all see the world through our own paradigm. Our paradigm in my understanding is how we define or see reality. It doesn't matter if our perception of reality is true or not, our paradigm convinces us that what we think about reality is the truth. So we act or react based upon our paradigm or our perception of reality.

I think the various sides of the gun debate see reality through different paradigms. If that is correct, there will never be any agreement until one side or the other has a paradigm shift. That only happens as the result of a significant emotional event according to Steven Covey.
My conclusion to this is that the winning side in the gun debate is the side with the most power hence the stand of the NRA or the Brady group.

I think we can debate the gun issue until hell freezes over and never come to an understanding or resolution because of the different paradigms we see reality through.

I came to this yesterday with an OP about needing guns in a rural setting. The OP stated many of the various reasons for needing a gun in remote living settings. I also lived in such a remote area and did not agree with the OP need for guns. Rather I saw the rural setting more safe than the urban setting and I did not own the kind of guns the OP talked about.
We both lived in rural remote areas but saw reality there through different paradigms.

Here is some further reading on paradigms and paradigm shifts by Thomas Kuhn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm

[bongbong]

1. In a nutshell

Are you scared (a Delicate Flower who needs guns to face the day), or are you not scared?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

2. Name-callers are motivated by a desire to cause conflict, not resolve it.

[riderinthestorm]

3. Agreed. The NRA has jacked up the meme that the answer to fear and paranoia is more guns

Its been remarkably effective. Combine that with the even crazier "Obama/Dems are going to take away your guns" and it provokes even more knee jerk reactions.

Very insightful upaloopa. I too am a rural, non gun owner and was astounded at the number of rural poster's whose answer to rural problems was a weapon. I've never had a single instance where a weapon was my preferred solution to any issue I've had here on my farm.

[upaloopa]

4. The cattlemen came to my house and said that my dogs were getting into their cattle pens and that

they could shoot them. So we did not let the dogs roam free and that solved the problem. Nice neighborly chat and no guns shooting dogs.

[jp76]

5. Rural is a pretty broad term.

Some areas are a bit less prone to predatory species. Where mountain lions are common, I certainly wouldn't raise livestock without having a rifle readily available. In the middle of the plains it's probably not as big an issue.

If you grow crops rather than livestock, I can certainly see where a gun would be less useful.

I guess what I'm saying is that the environment can define our needs and shape out perceptions. Try to be open and understanding of other people's needs and experiences. Just because your own experience hasn't shown something to be the best solution doesn't mean it won't work best for someone else or in a different environment.

[riderinthestorm]

6. I have 40 sport horses, organic commercial gardens, many dogs and cats, and cougars

foxes, coyotes, raccoons, possums, rabid wildlife and more.



Been in business here for 25 years without ever needing a weapon.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

7. In the middle of the plains, if you raise cattle that can break legs by stepping in holes caused

by rodents called prairie dogs, your choice is either leave the rodents alone, poison them (and risk unintentionally poisoning other animals), or shoot them.