scout26
Member
Northern Illinois Gun Owners
Back on 21 April the League of Women Voters sponsored a "forum" on reducing Gun Violence. They had ICHV and LCAV there to basically indoctrinate students from Wheaton North HS. Well even though I was there, Jerry Moore explains it better then me.
http://suburbanshoutout.wordpress.co...ond-amendment/
Du Page County residents and Illinois citizens present....
"Education is our best defense"
A Second Amendment, right to bear arms forum
Tuesday May 5Th 2009 7PM-9PM
At Wheaton City Hall Council Chambers
Our future Student leaders/High School students who are Second Amendment supporters invite Wheaton and neighboring communities to a forum on Tuesday May 5Th 2009 7PM-9PM.
Various students will talk about their future as it relates to the Right to bear arms, as well as why they are actively involved in training and education as it relates to the 2ND Amendment.
Their featured Speaker of the evening is Dr. Paula Bratich, Second Amendment Sisters Co- Coordinator Illinois Chapter. She will address concerns of women who deserve the opportunity to defend themselves.
Don Castella will update us on Conceal and Carry efforts in respective counties.
We invite people who would like to ask questions and discuss their supporting or opposing views. We will offer time at the end of the forum for open discussion.
This forum is free. This is the flip-side to the anti-gun "debate" held by the League of Women voters at the last meeting. As some of you know, there was a gag order put in place and the debate was limited to 3 questions. Please come out and help support this debate as we do expect the other side to try to crowd this meeting and try to put us on the defensive.
WHEN: Tuesday May 5Th 2009 7PM-9PM
WHERE: Wheaton (Illinois) City Hall, Council Chambers, 303 West Wesley Street, Wheaton, IL
Back on 21 April the League of Women Voters sponsored a "forum" on reducing Gun Violence. They had ICHV and LCAV there to basically indoctrinate students from Wheaton North HS. Well even though I was there, Jerry Moore explains it better then me.
http://suburbanshoutout.wordpress.co...ond-amendment/
League of Women Voters members ill-equipped to debate gun-control issue
One of my favorite biblical verses is from 1 Peter 3:15:
“Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.”
While this admonition is directed at Christians, it could well apply to anyone who is advocating some cause. For if they can’t address why they hold this belief, they’re not likely to persuade others. And what’s the point of advocating a cause if you can’t convince others that you’re right?
This is what happened last night in the Wheaton City Hall as members of the League of Women Voters stumbled through a forum on “sensible laws to prevent gun violence.” Organizers said the forum was originally planned only for students at Wheaton North High School. But word of the meeting spread, and nearly 200 people packed the City Council chambers to have their say.
The Illinois League of Women Voters has opted to advocate some gun-control measures to “close gun law loopholes.” Yesterday’s forum was organized by several local chapters of the League of Women Voters and the Illinois Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a project of the San Francisco-based public interest law firm Legal Community Against Violence.
Specifically, league members are promoting laws to require background checks on all gun purchases and mandate that all gun thefts be reported. Organizers of last night’s forum also lamented the lack of limits on how many guns someone may purchase in a given time, so I’m sure they’d also like to see this measure implemented.
Michelle Jordan is an issues specialist with the Illinois League of Women Voters who serves as state counsel for the Illinois Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. She moderated last night’s forum but didn’t do a good job.
When she wasn’t on script with her presentation, Jordan appeared defensive and dictatorial. She set the time right at the beginning of the event by telling audience members, “If you disrupt this forum, you will be politely asked to leave. And if you don’t leave, you will be escorted out by one of the police officers.”
And when people interrupted the proceedings, Jordan instructed a few of them to leave. At one point, an elderly woman was ushered out of the City Council chambers by several police officers for reminding audience members that they were Americans and had the right to have their say.
Regardless of where you stand on the issue of gun rights, you have to admit that this was an ill-advised use of law enforcement power. Police officers were all over the place in City Hall during the forum.
I understand that organizers want to have someone who can control anything that seems to be getting out of hand, but there’s a huge difference between people who merely want to speak their minds and those who want to incite violence. Using officers to escort an elderly woman out of the City Council chambers for committing the “crime” of voicing her opinion is absurd.
This made league members look as though they wanted to bully people into silence. If their goal is to ensure a safer community, wouldn’t it make more sense to have the police officers on the street catching criminals instead of intimidating peaceful but vocal residents inside City Hall?
Organizers also refused to allow audience members to ask questions of the presenters or challenge the information being presented. In a stunning declaration, Jordan told the residents, “This is a league forum, and this is not a place for debate.”
Granted, organizers felt their little party was crashed by people who weren’t invited to the festivities. They had intended to stage their presentation exclusively for the high school students, but they ended up with an impassioned crowd. So that organizers seemed a tad flustered is understandable.
But they could have taken a few steps to make things run more smoothly.
First, league members probably shouldn’t have planned this for high school students only. This gives opponents the idea that they’re out to indoctrinate young, impressionable minds with their ideology without the benefit of having their beliefs challenged.
But if they wanted to hold a forum only for the students, they should have held it at the school rather than City Hall. The school offers a more controlled environment where they would have been able to turn away people who weren’t invited.
The City Council chambers, however, is the primary meeting place in Wheaton for residents to gather and debate issues. This is the people’s meeting room, and anything held there dealing with public policy should be open to the people.
This is why I was shocked when Jordan said, “this is not a place for debate.” If members of the community can’t debate important issues here, where should they go?
Once they discovered that residents would be attending the forum, organizers should have altered the event’s structure somewhat. They should have struck a bargain with audience members: If the residents will allow the participants to offer their presentations uninterrupted, the forum will be opened to questions and comments afterward for the time they had left (I heard from someone at City Hall that organizers had the chambers for two hours, yet the event lasted about 40 minutes).
League members and as many participants as possible should have agreed to stay in the room and address the issues posed to them by residents. This would made it appear as though organizers valued the audience’s input and wanted to carry on a dialogue.
But by cutting off any debate, league members looked as though they weren’t prepared to answer the challenges made by residents. If they’re so unsure of themselves regarding the proposals they’re making, how do they intend to implement these ideas?
These are serious issues worthy of a healthy debate. But you have to be willing to have your ideas challenged if others are to take them to heart. In this instance, the League of Women Voters failed this test.