At this point, I tend to avoid participating in these discussions anymore (particularly on larger websites) because of how quickly "discussion" of the issue turns into soapboxing. At this point, it would be hard to effectively argue against the notion that Daesh and, by extension, a large contingent of the Muslim population of the world, is possessed of a worldview that at best views the West unfavorably and at worst believes in its extermination.

The problem is, where do we go from here? And that's where the "discussion" always seems to stop. Because there isn't a clear answer and some of the easier potentials to discuss are particularly thorny for a number of reasons. Do we believe our right to bear arms should trump the government's authority to enforce national security policy? If so, then do we assume that death at the hands of violent individuals must simply be an assumed risk of living in our society? And if not, then do we comfortable with the notion of a long-term, extensive effort to curtail gun ownership and trafficking in this country? Or do we instead turn outwards and claim that since this act was perpetrated by a particular belief, should we increase the government's authority to pursue individuals suspected of sympathy to said groups with greater autonomy and fewer legal restrictions? Do we as a society feel comfortable with restricting the rights of those who enter this country from a certain belief system? If not, how do you effectively police and monitor individuals without trampling on their civil liberties?

No one I know wants to have those discussions though. Because, odds are, we don't have nearly enough data or experience in security, policy, and socio-political relations to make a truly informed decision that could actually take shape in the form of policy. And yet time after time after time with events like these, like Sandy Hook, like Aurora, etc. etc. etc. the conversation never goes any further than righteous anger and accusations of weakness on the part of the "other team" who are clearly to blame for all of our faults in the world. And so begins the ritual of making the issue 20 parts politics and 1 part supporting the victims of the event and trying to encourage a more supportive, understanding, generally less-assholish way of living.

Because those are things that we, as citizens, could more directly affect than something as nebulous as managing the centuries long conflict of Islam with the entirety of the Western world, with all its facets, complications, intricacies and competing interests. At least, it's the conversation I wish I'd see more of. Maybe I'm of a minority opinion on this one.