Tuesday, December 18, 2012


After the senseless carnage in Connecticut that saw the death of 20 first graders and 6 adults, all from the same elementary school, Sandy Hook Elementary, I received this e-mail from Humanity's Team.

The e-mail describes several steps we can take, if we choose, to address the disaster, from volunteering to writing targeted e-mails.


Twenty first graders lost their lives with six adults last Friday at Sandy Hook Elementary school. Their loss follows horrific losses in Oregon, Colorado and countless locations before that including Norway, Germany, London and Australia. The responsibility to see that this never happens again now rests squarely with you and me.

Each person that falls to an automatic weapon from here out is our responsibility. If we speak up and courageously share what is true we can stop the slaughter. If we don’t speak up it will continue. We must not sit idle for a moment longer. We must do three things and we must do them now. First we must share we are all connected. Everything is part of One presence. Science is sharing this is true. We are all interconnected, interrelated and interdependent. Not only are we all connected, scripture tells us ‘we are made in the likeness and image of God’. We are connected in God/Divinity/Source. When we hurt another, we hurt our Self and when we hurt our Self we hurt the One presence, God. Very simply, when we drive an airplane into a building and kill others as happened on 9/11 or when we machine gun young first graders and the adults supervising them we are terminating life that is part of our Self and part of God. If we know this to be true we must share it because it is a powerful stop sign to killing and carnage.

Next, we must immediately ban automatic and semi-automatic weapons. They have no use except for mass killing. I met yesterday with Rabbi Zalman Schachter and his wife, Eve. They suggested we challenge the National Rifle Association to come up with a solution that bans automatic and semiautomatic weapons and still protects the second amendment to the U.S. Constitution (the right to bear arms). Let’s do this. Let's write to the National Rifle Association and challenge them to come up with a solution that accomplishes these things now, right now. Let’s tell them this is urgent and we will take this into our own hands if they don’t act fast, right now. Please write to the NRA now: https://nraila.org/secure/contact-us.aspx. Then, let’s keep up the pressure and do everything in our power to see that a ban on automatic and semi-automatic weapons is passed right away.

Finally, please send a quick note to your lawmakers: http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml asking them to enact legislation so that the mentally ill can be better identified and helped. Mental illness is also a large component of the onslaught of gun violence. If we are One, then we are One with all our brothers and sisters, and they need our assistance too.

People often ask how it is that about 100,000 people have come together all over the world to be part of Humanity’s Team, an almost all volunteer movement that is awakening the world to Oneness. Very simply, it is our cause. The paradigm of connection, of Oneness will put an end to killing now and forever. Our connection, our Oneness is a timeless truth verified by more and more scientists. When this truth, ultimate reality, is not talked about it encourages crimes against humanity and nature. The reverse is also true. When we talk about our connection, our Oneness, we come into responsibility to each other (connection always creates mutual responsibility).

This is precisely the point at this sober moment in time. We must not allow a single other to fall to automatic or semi-automatic gunfire. It is our responsibility to put an end to it and to do this now. Are you in? Together, let's find our voice and let’s create the course correct that is long overdue. People’s lives depend on it.

Thank you.

In Oneness,

Steve Farrell Worldwide Coordinating Director
Humanity’s Team


Steve P said...

you do realize that gun laws will do nothing to stop any of this correct?

the war against drugs costs this country billions of dollars and does almost nothing. how well do you think a war against guns will work?

you do know that weed is illegal correct? do you know that almost everyone has smoked it? do you know that anti drug laws are not preventing anything?

how well do you think banning guns will work? it may stifle gun crimes for five years or so but you know the same criminals that sell weed and cocaine will have so much more business once you make guns illegal.

why make a new market for the black market?

Black Diaspora said...

"you do realize that gun laws will do nothing to stop any of this correct?"

You're right, it won't stop "any of this," in the same way that laws against stealing don't stop stealing, or laws against driving while under the influence don't stop driving under the influence, and thousands of other laws that we have on the books to modify behavior or to prevent senseless, and brutal acts of violence.

But guess what? Those laws are still on the books, and many are enforced, before and after a crime, and guess again: It would be a helluva lot worse without them.

And if you don't agree with that, then our codified and statutory laws, our various law enforcement agencies, whether at the Federal level, FBI, ATF, or at the state and local level, municipal police departments and officers are just a joke--a joke with a big price tag.

"the war against drugs costs this country billions of dollars and does almost nothing."

I wouldn't go that far. Just imagine how pervasive drugs would be, and their use, without the "war," the toll on lives--on our streets and in our homes--were this war not waged.

Were all drugs legalized, and the rate of use increased concomitantly, the cost to society wouldn't be in the billions but in the trillions, loss of productivity, increased health costs, uptick in a variety of crimes, more accidents, on and off the job, a surge in liability claims, and just the beginning of a pervasive national nightmare.

Not all wars are conducted to stop the enemy altogether, so much as to stop its encroachment. It's as though we decided not to wage war on terror, because we'll never defeat terror.

But we can interdict it at times, slow it down at times, reduce its impact at times, and, yes, stop it at times--but no one believes for a second that the war on terror will be won, but we're still willing to battle it as long as it's deemed necessary.

"you do know that weed is illegal correct?"

Actually, I don't know that. There are 18 states and DC that have legalized or decriminalized medical marijuana.

"do you know that almost everyone has smoked it?"

Only about 42% of Americans surveyed have tried pot at least once. That's hardly "everyone."

"do you know that anti drug laws are not preventing anything?"

We could say the same about all laws on the book, so that's a weak argument.

Laws aren't there to eliminate all crimes, but to reduce the impact, the instances, and the gross violations that would lead to conditions that would harm the very fabric of society, lead to chaotic situations where society could possibly cease to exist, and in its place, lawlessness, and a return to every man for himself, literally, where contracts wouldn't be honored, social and otherwise, and the legal framework that coheres society, and supports its enduring underpinnings would be weakened considerably, potentially leading to its collapse overtime.

steve p said...

"Were all drugs legalized, and the rate of use increased concomitantly, the cost to society wouldn't be in the billions but in the trillions, loss of productivity"

this argument is defiantly not correct. drugs were very legal when this country was founded... I suppose the individuals that started America could not get anything done, because crime on the streets was costing way too much... doesn't sound right.

Second, do you remember what happened during prohibition? crime... tons of it.. gangs.. organized crime... death

All because criminals could make a profit off of it on the black market.

and prohibition DID NOT stop the consumption of alcohol it just forced it underground. ever heard of a speakeasy? oh and the police were in on it too.... they wanted to drink as well.

make guns illegal and it wont stop people from wanting them, and you will empower the criminals and give them a new stream of income

"Only about 42% of Americans surveyed have tried pot at least once"

ha ha ha, yes people will be honest about there illegal activates in a survey.

"We could say the same about all laws on the book, so that's a weak argument"

this is if you assume laws are what gives humans a moral compass. What laws against infringing on individuals rights are required , mostly to put individuals away that cause crime, not really to stop it.

and last but not least. If someone is capable of murder they will get a gun and kill.... illegally if need be.

oh and you should ban fertilizer as well, that's what the Oklahoma state bombers used, and they killed 160.

no guns req.

Black Diaspora said...

Knock yourself out, Steve P. Stay as long as you like, as long as your comments are G Rated.

For my part, I reserve my responses for commenters whose arguments are cogent, who are well-informed, and don't descend into political inanity.

If you're looking for a fight, rather than a debate of ideas, solutions, and outcomes, look elsewhere. I'm a man of peace and would rather "switch than fight."

For your information, the Founding Fathers founded this country because they feared that the have-nots (which most were at the time) would take from the haves (the wealthy, propertied class); they distrusted corporations (that has changed), and believed that if the people didn't have a voice in their own governance, they would destroy any Republic that was formed in their name.

Good luck!

Steve P said...

"If you're looking for a fight, rather than a debate of ideas, solutions, and outcomes, look elsewhere. I'm a man of peace and would rather "switch than fight."

that's what we were doing, debating. unless the definition has changed.

perhaps you are just afraid to debate period, you fear that your beliefs' have no substance so when confronted with a point of view that has substance you seek to demoralize or demean that point of view

If I do not agree with a post I am not sure how you would like me to phrase a response. I don't think I could have been more respectful or less harsh.

if you want a podium and do not wish to be challenge I suggest you remove the comment section on your blog.

I have made many men/women both democrat and republican second guess their beliefs.

you have to be open to new ideas, ignorance and a closed mind never solved any problems. its the only advice I can give you as a man of peace.