The general tone of the discussion seems to be on treating or curing violence, as if it were a disease. However, there seems to be some debate on how to cure violence and if it can really be cured, or simply treated for its symptoms. One treatment of violence that seemed to be widely supported was the actions of CeaseFire. One issue that was mentioned was CeaseFire’s lack of addressing drug use and other criminal activity that can happen within gangs, but instead focusing on simply ending shootings. A concensus was formed though where most found CeaseFire’s methods to be the most effective to achieve their primary goal, ending shooting violence. Another treatment or cure to violence that was mentioned was education, or more generally, changing habits. Many believe that educating communities, and especially the youth, about the dangers of gang culture and the need for non-violence can lead to a shift in the behaviors of the community. Education was widely portrayed as a panacea for violence, but little seemed to be discussed in regards to tangible steps to educate these communities, possibly because this was outside of the scope of this discussion. Finally, a few of the comments focused on issues in the tone and focus of the articles that were read. One mentioned the failure of the articles to address other people exposed to violence, such as those that come from an abusive household. Another discussion cautioned against comparing the two articles to each other too much, since war-zones and gang-communities can differ in many aspects.
toastedravioli on Manifesto Destiny For All… bellajoelleseiz on Taking Control sproles43 on Call to Action: The Food Deser… solebearing on Government + Education daretobepresent on Food Desert