Revealing that which is concealed. Learning about anything that resembles real freedom. A journey of self-discovery shared with the world.
Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them - Ephesians 5-11
Join me and let's follow that high road...
Tuesday, August 13, 2019
Red Flag Laws (Or How To Repeal The Second Amendment Soviet-Style Without A Pesky Vote)
“Now, you see all these red flags? Trouble spots. Southeastern
Asia. The Caribbean. The Congo. I’ll give you one guess as to who’s
responsible.” – Doctor Goldfoot and the Bikini Machine
I look much better after I’ve had a cup of coffee. And after I’ve found my axe.
I know that you, gentle reader, have thoughts about guns that are probably pretty similar to mine, so I’d like to take you on a short walk through history, specifically the history of politics and psychiatry. I promise, it will make more sense than the lyrics to the Manfred Mann song Blinded by the Light. What the hell is a go-cart Mozart, and why is he checking out the weather chart, anyway? (Related: Civil War Weather Reports – Civil War II Weather Report: Spicy Time Coming, Civil War Weather Report #2, Censorship, Stalin, and a Bunch of Links, and Civil War Weather Report #3: Violence, China, and Lots of Links) The history of psychiatry is tied directly to the political.
I have seen a person suffering from schizophrenia to such a degree
that they were sure that MTV® video stars were stealing songs directly
from their brain and that they were also a surgeon who regularly
performed operations on world leaders and stored their organs in the
freezer for safe keeping.
If no one has ever told you that there are human organs belonging to
world leaders in their fridge in a completely matter-of-fact “would you
like a glass of water” voice, well, all I can tell you is that my first
thought was one of complete disbelief that I had heard them right. Yes,
I asked for them to repeat that statement. Twice.
I walked over and checked their freezer. Thankfully the only things
in it were some frozen pizzas and ancient ice cubes. I assure you I
was talking to their shrink that afternoon and they were involuntarily
committed by 5PM. They were helped, and after being put on some
appropriately industrial levels of anti-psychotic medication, did okay
enough to be released back into the wild. As long as they stayed on
their meds.
I know that there are actually crazy people that really need help. But I also know this: psychiatry is still the most politically abused medical profession. Okay, if Depp isn’t crazy, why does he keep starring in movies like this? Examples of political abuse of psychiatry? There are many.
When I mentioned this topic to The Mrs., she immediately said, “the
Soviet Union.” And that’s the example I thought of first, too. The
Soviets systematically used diagnosis of psychological disorders such as
“philosophical intoxication” and “sluggish schizophrenia” to put people
who didn’t like Marxism into mental institutions. And, no, those
diagnoses aren’t lame jokes – those were really Soviet-era diagnoses. How many were caught up in the psychological gulags?
We really don’t know since those records are still secret, but in
1978 at least 4.5 million Soviet citizens were listed as having mental
health problems. In 1988, perhaps thinking that they might face their
own version of Soviet Nuremburg Trials for Crimes Against Humanity,Soviet leaders had over 800,000 thousand patients removed from the list of the mentally ill. Paperwork error, surely? Okay, with all those red flags, how did they not see the collapse of communism coming? Did the Soviets condemn thousands with false diagnosis? Nearly certainly. Hundreds of thousands? Very likely.
Millions?
Probably. Think of it, millions of people falsely diagnosed with a
mental illness due to political beliefs and sent to asylums and work
camps. Certainly some were executed. The Soviets allowed ownership of smoothbore weapons for hunting.
Except when they didn’t. Which was most of the time. Oh, and the
definition of sweet summer child is: a person who doesn’t know the
hardships of winter, often used when someone has no experience with a
particular (stressful) thing, which may describe a generation that
rhymes with perennial. Okay, it was just the Soviet Union, right? No. Cuba did the same thing. There is evidence
that China is still doing it, and likely on scale similar to that of the
Soviet Union. Thankfully the World Psychiatric Association took the
lead in investigations. Oh, they didn’t? The World Psychiatric
Association pretty much ignored it and said that people associated with
Falun Gong are nuts and that putting them in asylums run by the state
security apparatus (not the medical directorate) was perfectly normal? One flew east, one flew west, one flew over the cuckoo’s nest . .
. and if you haven’t see the movie, you should, it’s a lighthearted
comedy and perfect for a first date. Okay, that’s just China. Thankfully this would never happen in the United States. Oh, it did?
Sure. In the 1920’s dissidents (like one who protested the trial of
Sacco and Vanzetti) were put into asylums. In the 1960’s members of the
American Psychological Association smeared presidential candidate Barry
Goldwater in the press by diagnosing him. But that wasn’t political,
right?
Thankfully it isn’t happening now. Oh, in 2012 a whistleblower with the NYPD was railroaded on mental health? Ouch. But New York is corrupt.
It would never happen based on political motives, right?
Dinesh D’Souza, author and filmmaker on the Right was convicted of a
crime based on giving too much money to a political campaign. He
admitted he was wrong. The Federal Judge involved in the case sentenced
D’Souza not only to prison, he sentenced D’Souza to years of mental health counselling despite a licensed psychologist saying that D’Souza was just fine mentally. So, yes. Psychiatry is a political weapon. It’s not like the Left has sentenced political opponents to chemotherapy, but I hear that they’re working on it. Yes, this is a common sense way to use psychiatry! This corrupt branch of medicine is the background of the Red Flag Laws.
The idea is that we’ll create laws to remove rights from people
without due process, with the presumption that individuals should lose a
right guaranteed by the Constitution®. A single accuser, with no evidence can result in gun confiscation to a law-abiding citizen. Sadly this already happens
– people with contested domestic restraining orders (a standard tactic
in divorces nowadays) lose their rights, although I’ve heard of people
fighting these orders and winning – at least there is a pretense at due
process. The claim that the ability to strip people of rights won’t be abused is laughable. In every country
that’s been infected by psychiatry, it has been twisted to meet
political ends. Yes, there are crazy people. I’ve seen one as I
related above. And, if you did a brain scan, there is a physical basis
for schizophrenia. It’s real. It is a medical condition. But
remember, these are the same psychiatrists that would diagnose me as
nuts if I believed I was be five years older than I really am, but are
perfectly fine with children younger than the age of five claiming they
are a different sex than their genetics have made them.
Furthermore, the medical profession as a whole is maybe a bit, well,
mental*. In one study it was claimed that 50% of female doctors could
be diagnosed with a mental disease. I wonder again why my ex didn’t
take up medicine? (*Aesop LINK excluded, unless pimp-slapping in the comments section is classified as a mental disorder.) Oh, and psychologists have nearly the highest rates of suicide of any profession. Yes, any profession, including the people who make balloon animals in Mauschwitz Disneyland®
for chubby children with hands sticky from chocolate ice cream.
Perfectly stable. And this is also the same profession whose
international governing body (WPA) was just fine with political
repression in the name of psychiatry. Besides being oppressive, the Red Flag laws would not have
helped in latest shootings – these people lawfully and legally got their
rifles.
But they will form the basis for taking away guns for...
Comments Made When You Were 16 – Wow, did you really say that maybe the Crusades weren’t all bad? No pew-pew for you, hater.
Not Believing in the Easter Bunny Socialism – Well, I think I covered that above.
The irony is this will have the impact of keeping people away from mental health professionals.
This will keep people from seeking help when they’re a little
depressed, because the consequences of having a “health record” might
prevent them from future opportunity – the only safe way to live life
would be to stay away from health professionals – and not answer certain
questions your M.D. might have for you with a polite BFYTW when asked
why you’re not answering. Oh, but that probably puts you on the
antisocial list. Texas may or may not be your cup of tea, but they certainly got some things right once upon a time. Psychiatry is on pretty iffy ground in many cases already.
As an experiment, a group of doctors sent people to a psychiatrist with
one symptom – they heard a voice. No other symptom. They were
perfectly normal, mentally healthy people. In one case, the person was
committed to a mental health facility (as I recall) for several weeks
with zero symptoms. I tried to look it up, but, surprise, most Google®
searches right now link commitment to . . . violence. Even that’s not a
comfortable thought. Soviet mental health nurse. Not shown: tenth guard, who is now an inmate.
The single scariest thing to me is watching a human mind erode – what
was once a rational human disappears. It’s what makes (to me) zombies
scary. They look like humans. They used to be a
normal human. But that rational human being is now gone, replaced by
someone who has no real tie to reality while the external form remains.
I realize that there is a time and a place for psychiatric care.
But psychiatrists are already owned by the Left. The Left sees you
as crazy already. The Left views your dissent from their agenda as a
mental disorder, one punishable by death, if need be. I’ll leave the last word to Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who is really
pictured above while in the gulag: “I’ll take Solzhenitsyn on Gun
Control for $1000, Alex. Oh, look – the Daily Double®!”
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: what would things
have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to
make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and
had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass
arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of
the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling
with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on
the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had
boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people
with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? [They] would
very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and,
notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have
ground to a halt! If . . . if . . . we didn’t love freedom
enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation . . . .
We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
from the internet
----------
Psychiatry is largely hogwash, which is why it can be manipulated for political purposes.
You can go to three different psychiatrists and get three different diagnoses.
Unless regular medicine, which can take X-Rays and CATScans to prove
there is a tumor, etc., psychiatry has no such tools. It is all made up
out of thin air.
Read a bit about Freud and Jung. These are the founders of modern psychiatry. Pure nonsense.
I once took a class on Jung, made up my paper about my experiences
out of thin air and the professor was so taken with it, he asked my
permission to read it to future classes. Enough said.
----------
Having successfully completed phase one they will perhaps move on to the next phases.
A mass shooting event complete with a manifesto clearly stating that this attack was a response fueled by “Conspiracy Theory”.
Dangerous “Conspiracy Theorists”will be identified and red-lined with respect to gun ownership.
The dangers that “Conspiracy Theorists” pose to public order will be
further addressed by social media and account red-lining and in some
cases the confiscation of computer equipment, servers and data bases.
---
It
SHOULD be a clue - even to DUMB AMERICANS - that the DIRECT LINEAGE of
those same BOLSHEVIKS, that Solzhenitsyn refers to in that least
paragraph, now rule the roost in ZOG USSA... and, more than likely,
planning on applying the same "solution" to "undesirables"
---------------
The left can go suck a bag of dicks ..and take your red flag laws with you.
-------------
"Red Flag" laws, which have been a hot topic of discussion since last weekend, are designed to take guns away from mentally unstable people before they can harm themselves or anyone else.
This sounds good in theory, but in practice, such laws are a danger
to mentally healthy people in our day and a threat to the Constitution
to boot.
The main question is this: Who gets to decide who is too mentally
unstable to own a firearm? And how is that decision made? Most newly
adopted laws (six such laws have been signed this year) and newly
proposed laws (two dozen have been introduced in various states) require
some kind of certification from a mental health professional that a
judge can then use to confiscate someone's firearm(s).
To put it bluntly, this puts your right to own a firearm into the
hands of the American Psychological Association or the American
Psychiatric Association, who will set the standards for the mental
health community. No thanks.
These groups, for instance, once correctly viewed homosexuality as
prima facie evidence of a profound mental disorder. But now they think
that those who still believe that are the mentally disordered ones.
There are many on the left, including many in the helping
professions, who think of conservative Christians as mentally disordered
and incurable bigots, racists, homophobes, and xenophobes, and
fantasists who believe in an invisible but powerful friend in the sky
whom no one has ever seen. If these mental health professionals acquire
the authority to legally recommend the confiscation of firearms, every
liberty we value will be placed at risk.
As NRA spokesman Catherine Mortensen said, any risk-protection orders
must include, at a minimum, "strong due process protections." After
all, we are talking here about an explicit constitutional right, the
right to own and carry firearms, enshrined in the Constitution as one of
the inalienable rights bestowed on us by the Creator.
The Constitution is clear that an individual can be required by the
state to forfeit a constitutional right, but only after he has received
"due process" first. This means that he must be indicted for a crime
established by lawmakers, have the right to face his accusers in open
court, be put on trial before a jury of his peers, and have the
assistance of counsel. If a jury finds him guilty, then and only then
can he be deprived of his right to self-defense.
If lawmakers are serious about these protection orders, then some
form of treatment must be required if the restriction is to do any good.
Who will administer the treatment and who will be required to pay for
it? Do we have any evidence that conventional professional counseling
even works in situations like these? Otherwise, it's all just feel-good
legislation that accomplishes nothing.
Will such legally prescribed treatments include confinement in a
facility? That's important because it involves the revocation of another
inalienable right, the right to liberty. Will such extreme risk orders
include meaningful punishments for those who inevitably will make false
claims in circumstances of high interpersonal conflict? What exactly
will those penalties be?
Finally, if a judge manages to take a firearm away from someone he
considers dangerous, what will prevent the accused from simply finding
another weapon? According to researcher Clayton Cramer, mass murders have been carried out with axes and hatchets and knives, with fire, poison gas, explosives, and vehicles.
Another danger is that, if mental stability becomes the issue, anyone
who is on any kind of prescription psychotropic medication from
antidepressants on up will be suspect.
In USA Today's list of mass murders for the years 2008 to
2017, almost 25 percent were carried out without guns. We don't hear
much about them because they don't fit the left's narrative that it is gunsand not people which are inherently evil.
On top of all this, only about 25 percent of all mass shooters had
been clinically declared mentally ill before the carnage occurred.
Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun-control organization, says only about
half the gunmen in mass shootings even exhibit warning signs before the
killings. How does that help us with the other half?
Besides which, in America, we do not punish people for what they mightdo.
The only solution is the one that has been there since 1789: The
Second Amendment, which guarantees the right of all Americans to defend
themselves with a weapon at home and in public. Of all mass shootings in
the last 70 years, 98 percent have taken place in gun-free zones which
turn into human shooting galleries when nobody in the place can shoot
back. It turns out the only ones who were gun-free were the ones who
needed a gun to protect themselves. Red flag laws aren't going to do
anything about that.
---------------
You can go to three different psychiatrists and get three different diagnoses.
Unless regular medicine, which can take X-Rays and CATScans to prove there is a tumor, etc., psychiatry has no such tools. It is all made up out of thin air.
Read a bit about Freud and Jung. These are the founders of modern psychiatry. Pure nonsense.
I once took a class on Jung, made up my paper about my experiences out of thin air and the professor was so taken with it, he asked my permission to read it to future classes. Enough said.
----------
-
A mass shooting event complete with a manifesto clearly stating that this attack was a response fueled by “Conspiracy Theory”.
-
Dangerous “Conspiracy Theorists”will be identified and red-lined with respect to gun ownership.
-
The dangers that “Conspiracy Theorists” pose to public order will be
further addressed by social media and account red-lining and in some
cases the confiscation of computer equipment, servers and data bases.
It
SHOULD be a clue - even to DUMB AMERICANS - that the DIRECT LINEAGE of
those same BOLSHEVIKS, that Solzhenitsyn refers to in that least
paragraph, now rule the roost in ZOG USSA... and, more than likely,
planning on applying the same "solution" to "undesirables"
---------------
The left can go suck a bag of dicks ..and take your red flag laws with you.---
"Red Flag" laws, which have been a hot topic of discussion since last weekend, are designed to take guns away from mentally unstable people before they can harm themselves or anyone else.
This sounds good in theory, but in practice, such laws are a danger to mentally healthy people in our day and a threat to the Constitution to boot.
The main question is this: Who gets to decide who is too mentally unstable to own a firearm? And how is that decision made? Most newly adopted laws (six such laws have been signed this year) and newly proposed laws (two dozen have been introduced in various states) require some kind of certification from a mental health professional that a judge can then use to confiscate someone's firearm(s).
To put it bluntly, this puts your right to own a firearm into the hands of the American Psychological Association or the American Psychiatric Association, who will set the standards for the mental health community. No thanks.
These groups, for instance, once correctly viewed homosexuality as prima facie evidence of a profound mental disorder. But now they think that those who still believe that are the mentally disordered ones.
There are many on the left, including many in the helping professions, who think of conservative Christians as mentally disordered and incurable bigots, racists, homophobes, and xenophobes, and fantasists who believe in an invisible but powerful friend in the sky whom no one has ever seen. If these mental health professionals acquire the authority to legally recommend the confiscation of firearms, every liberty we value will be placed at risk.
As NRA spokesman Catherine Mortensen said, any risk-protection orders must include, at a minimum, "strong due process protections." After all, we are talking here about an explicit constitutional right, the right to own and carry firearms, enshrined in the Constitution as one of the inalienable rights bestowed on us by the Creator.
The Constitution is clear that an individual can be required by the state to forfeit a constitutional right, but only after he has received "due process" first. This means that he must be indicted for a crime established by lawmakers, have the right to face his accusers in open court, be put on trial before a jury of his peers, and have the assistance of counsel. If a jury finds him guilty, then and only then can he be deprived of his right to self-defense.
If lawmakers are serious about these protection orders, then some form of treatment must be required if the restriction is to do any good. Who will administer the treatment and who will be required to pay for it? Do we have any evidence that conventional professional counseling even works in situations like these? Otherwise, it's all just feel-good legislation that accomplishes nothing.
Will such legally prescribed treatments include confinement in a facility? That's important because it involves the revocation of another inalienable right, the right to liberty. Will such extreme risk orders include meaningful punishments for those who inevitably will make false claims in circumstances of high interpersonal conflict? What exactly will those penalties be?
Finally, if a judge manages to take a firearm away from someone he considers dangerous, what will prevent the accused from simply finding another weapon? According to researcher Clayton Cramer, mass murders have been carried out with axes and hatchets and knives, with fire, poison gas, explosives, and vehicles.
Another danger is that, if mental stability becomes the issue, anyone who is on any kind of prescription psychotropic medication from antidepressants on up will be suspect.
In USA Today's list of mass murders for the years 2008 to 2017, almost 25 percent were carried out without guns. We don't hear much about them because they don't fit the left's narrative that it is guns and not people which are inherently evil.
On top of all this, only about 25 percent of all mass shooters had been clinically declared mentally ill before the carnage occurred. Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun-control organization, says only about half the gunmen in mass shootings even exhibit warning signs before the killings. How does that help us with the other half?
Besides which, in America, we do not punish people for what they might do.
The only solution is the one that has been there since 1789: The Second Amendment, which guarantees the right of all Americans to defend themselves with a weapon at home and in public. Of all mass shootings in the last 70 years, 98 percent have taken place in gun-free zones which turn into human shooting galleries when nobody in the place can shoot back. It turns out the only ones who were gun-free were the ones who needed a gun to protect themselves. Red flag laws aren't going to do anything about that.
---------------