Welcome to the Group Discussion that you’re now going to see. Listen to the topic carefully and observe the manner of its overall collective expression i.e. its content, content delivery process and style, spoken language, body language, coordination among group members, mistakes [if any] etc. You need to consciously attend to how the topic develops logically and gradually with all its key points organically connected and intertwined. You can tell whether it’s conclusive or inclusive. You can also imitate it by talking on the same topic and, desirably, in a different manner, with different (particularly verbal) expressions. In short, it’s re-creating the same G.D. session in a different manner. Let’s see it first. Ready?


Name of the topic: Terrorism at Your Doorstep_ Every
Citizen is a Cop without a Uniform. L1: We are here to talk about the topic, Terrorism at Your Doorstep_ Every Citizen is a Cop without a Uniform. Here the emphasis would be more on the citizen’s duties and responsibilities as a fighter against terrorism and less on the topic of terrorism since it’s been known to all of us well and has been amply discussed cutting across all sorts of boundaries. Ready? S1: Sir, fighting against terrorism requires unity. We need to come together and speak against the destructive forces irrespective of religion, class, caste, gender, political affiliations and different ideologies and viewpoints. United we stand, divided we fall. Against terrorism, the world should unitedly stand up and speak loudly with one voice that there would be zero tolerance for terrorism in a civilized society and no place for violence. S2: That’s right S1, but your viewpoint appears quite Utopian. In reality, this can hardly happen as people are more concerned about their day-to-day affairs that they hardly find any time for that. No doubt, terrorism is a serious problem but it needs to dealt with in a different manner. The inclusion of this problem in sociology textbooks as well as forums, seminars and conferences, group discussions, as we do here, now etc. done on a wide scale can instill amongst the young students the gravity of the situation. Also, compulsory military education to every able bodied youngster above the age of 18 for at least a year during which time he would be taught certain fighting strategies and given disaster management training. Those who qualify the training successfully can be given a licensed pistol to be

used against terrorists if the 26/11 Mumbai style terrorist attack takes place. At least the militarily trained youth from metro area need to be equipped with a 6-bore pistol. They can give terrorists a befitting reply if they create such sort of mischief or misadventure. S3: My dear S2/fellow, this is not viable to train every able bodied youth as the young are in millions across the country and constitute more than the billion-plus population of India. Giving all the trained young men pistols can create the grave law and order situation if some cases of sporadic individual or group fights out of anger, communal grievances, envy, enmity or rivalry erupt_ some of them misusing these licensed pistols against one another. This situation would be even graver than terrorism itself, producing fear, insecurity, chaos and panic. The cops would have to spend their time, resources and energy dealing with such sporadic cases of violence, thus, diverting their attention from their anti-terror vigilance duties. This can aggravate the problem further giving free rein to terrorists to spread there activities and fish in troubled waters. As far as I think military training and providing arms to trained youth is not a proper solution against terror malaise. S4: Don’t all of you think that evil of violence lies in all of us? You know animal is skin deep and can erupt any time like a volcano. Can the fear of arms and ammunition cause terror in violent tendencies that are widespread or at least control them effectively? Terrorism is the byproduct of violence. Terrorists are not simply those who wear masks and fight against governments on ideological or political grounds by holding guns or rocket launchers. Terrorists are those who create fear, insecurity, threat to life and property as well as panic by violent means as in riots, in houses against their own women or sisters and children, in neighbourhood lootings, conspiracies against public wellbeing by resorting to fraudulent means. I think we need to redefine the concept of terrorism first by

understanding it in its broadened form and with all its details and then fight against it methodically by using logic and judicious actions. You cannot move headlong against it like a battering ram; there are no silver bullets or quick-fix solutions nor sure-fire remedies against it as it’s a complex problem. Value education can solve this problem up to larger extent. The Indian public has to fight a terrorist right from within their selves first_ a terrorist, symbolizing violence, might hide and lurk within you. You need to destroy it within you first. If you succeed to do so, it’s easy to fight the outside terrorists. S5: What S4 says appears quite right. But it’s again an ideological part. Ideologies appear rosy when presented with nice words and expressions as S4 has done but they almost melt or evaporate when they touch the hot ground of sordid realities. I think, vigilance is the watchword.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful