June 20, 2018

Gun Control Laws Aimed At Public Safety: The Devil is in the Definitions

Yesterday I posted a notice about the intent of Maine lawmakers to introduce a bill disguised as a “Community Protection Order” that will “Prevent High-Risk Individuals” from possessing firearms.

Some may say the intent of the proposed legislation is a good idea and perhaps that is true to some extent. A serious argument can be made as to whether such a law is an infringement on the Second Amendment as well as Due Process.

But forget about that for a moment.

Much of the problem with any of these laws is that interpretations of definitions are left up to a court and the arguments of lawyers. That, in and of itself, should alert us immediately to serious problems.

The crux of this proposed legislation is centered around “mental illness” and/or a person’s propensity toward violent and emotional behavior. Recognizing the seriousness of these conditions is a matter of a person’s perspective. Do we really want to limit Due Process based on the perspective of a judge?

LD 1884, is the Maine proposed bill which is the matter of topic. I’ll go ahead and post what this legislation uses for “definitions” to help understand the intent of the law and offer comments after.

§ 401.  Definitions

As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise indicates, the following terms have the following meanings.

1.  Community protection order.   “Community protection order” means a written order signed by the court that prohibits and enjoins temporarily, if issued pursuant to subchapter 2, or on an extended basis, if issued pursuant to subchapter 3, a named individual from having a firearm in that individual’s custody or control or owning, purchasing, possessing or receiving or attempting to purchase or receive a firearm.
2.  Family or household member.   “Family or household member” has the same meaning as in Title 19-A, section 4002, subsection 4.
3.  High-risk individual.   “High-risk individual” means an individual who presents an imminent and substantial risk of serious bodily injury or death to the individual or to another individual and:

A.  Has a mental illness that may be controlled by medication but has not demonstrated a pattern of voluntarily and consistently taking the individual’s medication while not under supervision; or
B.  Is the subject of documented evidence that would give rise to a reasonable belief that the individual has a propensity for violent or emotionally unstable conduct.

The fact that an individual has been released from a mental health facility or has a mental illness that is currently controlled by medication does not establish that the individual presents an imminent and substantial risk of serious bodily injury or death to the individual or to another individual for the purposes of this chapter. As used in this subsection, “mental illness” has the same meaning as in section 3318-A, subsection 1, paragraph B.

4.  Restrained individual.   “Restrained individual” means an individual who is the subject of a community protection order.
Community Protection Order – Of note here is that this order can be issued in one of two ways – either as a temporary order by a court that has determined that an individual fits the bill’s criteria of being barred from having anything to do with a gun, or the same conditions on an extended basis once again according to the interpretation of the court of Subchapters 2 and 3.
The title of this order is designed to mislead the public into thinking this is the will of the “community” a communistic term and that it is for the purpose of keeping that “community” safe from those with a “mental illness.” After all, all those with a “mental illness” are mass murderers…right?
High-Risk Individual – This is where things get really dicey. A “High-Risk Individual” is here defined as someone who a judge thinks (his perspective of course because there are no real definitions for this condition) is going to hurt himself or another person. In addition to this perceived condition, this person has a “mental illness” – again an interpretation based on biased training or thinking/ideology. Once a court decides for themselves a person has a mental illness they must then decide whether they think this person has been taking their medications as prescribed by some quack doctor.
The suggestion here is that if a judge, having decided you have a “mental” condition, deems that you haven’t demonstrated “a pattern of voluntarily and consistently” taking your pills you lose your right to self-protection and due process.
Part B of this section is a real doozy! If it is shown “through evidence” (wink-wink) that actions by any person with a court’s definition of mental illness can show a “reasonable belief” that such a person has a disposition toward “violent or emotionally unstable conduct,” then they will be issued a Community Protection Order – perhaps ostracized for life.
The real joke is when the authors of the bill attempt to mislead the voters by saying just because a person has a mental illness, and has been “released from” a nut house, so long as they are being good brain-dead zombies and taking their chemicals, doesn’t necessarily mean they are a threat to the valued “community.” RIGHT!
History has shown us that it is most often a needless task to keep “mentally ill” people institutionalized and pumped up or down with chemicals and is a drain to that valued community, so they are gathered up and murdered. After all, these valued communities cannot be bogged down and given bad images from anyone with a “mental illness.” They MIGHT pose a threat, real or imagined, to their way of life. Society decides who lives and who dies.
Restrained Individual – Once you have met all the criteria that the “Community” has determined using their own standards of measurements, including societal tolerances, political ideology, and in general operation under the fear instilled in them by actions of a fascist governmental regime, the lucky winner becomes labeled as a “Restrained Individual.” How fortunate.
Whether you agree with the intent of the proposed bill or not shouldn’t matter once you consider how such fascist laws, put into play by willing and eager totalitarians, are a serious threat to any society that still deems itself to be free.
Giving power to the Courts and to governments to make decisions based on highly abstract and illusory definitions is quite akin to National Socialism. If you don’t fully comprehend National Socialism then you haven’t been paying very close attention.
There are channels that already exist in which efforts to control a deranged person from committing mass murder. If the information given to the public about the shooting in Parkland, Florida is at all truthful, then the lesson to walk away with is that those with authority to have intervened failed in their jobs. Insanity tells us to make more fascist laws that will not and cannot be enforced will somehow make a difference.
But this problem is not endemic to Maine. Since the Parkland, Florida shooting many state governments and the Federal government have proposed laws that are similar that leave the interpretation of what determines a mental illness, propensity to violence, or emotional unstableness up to the courts and the governments. Even fake Second Amendment advocates have stood firmly behind such insane legislation.
With each passing day, it amazes me more and more the eagerness of totalitarian useful idiots to help tie the noose that will one day be their demise. In the days of Marx and Stalin, when these two were finished using those that helped bring them to power, they just murdered them to get them out of their way.
So what’s happening to you today?
Share

Shared Goal: Reduce Violence, Make Communities Safer?

Jim Shepherd at the Outdoor Wire ended his optimistic piece by telling readers that the National Shooting Sports Foundation sent out a press release encouraging people to become involved in the conversation, “to see violence in our society reduced and our communities and our children made safer.”

So far every so-called Second Amendment advocate group and most individual s0-called Second Amendment supporters have only talked about banning guns not being an answer, but have been willing to ignorantly support ridiculous efforts to make schools safer by “educating” (propagandizing/brainwashing) the public about violence and mental illness, while giving law enforcement more authority and leeway to confiscate your guns.

What’s not being addressed, and probably never will, are those issues that have MADE this society violent, angry, mentally ill, chemically altered, etc. that drives a person to exemplify that abnormal manipulation into violent actions.

If the real “Shared Goal” is to reduce violence and make our communities and children safer, the conversation needs to be broadened into areas where most people will become uncomfortable. It will never happen. Too much money at stake.

Share

I’m Not All In With This Man’s “Gun Culture”

I read this article this morning of a man describing his world of “gun culture.” I thought a lot of it was well presented, although I didn’t necessarily agree with all of it, including some of the “feelings” he gets from carrying a concealed weapon, etc.

What I disagreed with the most was what is on display in this country at present. Somehow the “gun culture” has taken the high road, while on the one hand promoting a person’s right to self-defense and to keep and bear arms, and on the other hand assuming the role of a good totalitarian in support of fascist government regulation and control over an inalienable right to keep and bear arms and a person’s choice as to how to do that.

The author writes: “Many gun-rights supporters were appalled to learn after the Sutherland Springs shooting that the military was systematically underreporting disqualifying convictions to the federal background check database. Under pressure, the military has added more than 4,000 new names in just three months. Similarly, law-enforcement failures or background-check failures that preceded, for example, the Virginia Tech, Charleston, Orlando, Sutherland Springs, and Parkland shootings are spurring serious new consideration of the gun violence restraining order, a move that would allow family members and others close to a potential shooter to get in front of a judge to request that the court direct law enforcement to temporarily seize a dangerous person’s weapons. It gives ordinary citizens a chance to “do something” after they “see something” and “say something.

The intent here is understandable. What is seriously flawed in the circular thinking process is the belief that some Second Amendment restrictions affect only the lawful citizen and others don’t. This action requires that the True Believer fully trusts his government to do the right thing and protect us. How has that worked in the past?

I can’t be a part of this “gun culture.” I don’t like government telling me how, when and with what, I can defend myself.

The author is proud that the military has turned in more names of those now prohibited from buying and owning a gun, with complete faith and trust that each and every one of them was justified…by whose standards I might ask. Seriously, is there any valid reason that we should believe and trust the government to do anything that is right?

The writer has complete faith in his government that a “temporary” taking of a person’s property, deeming them “dangerous” (by whose standards I ask again?) is a good thing. And, I’ll bet this same person is the first to wonder why his inalienable right to protection is being systematically taken away and by piecemeal being ceded over to the Government for administration.

By God don’t we ever learn anything?

Share

Maine Legislature Approves Consideration of Four Fascist Bills They Claim Will Make Schools Safer

Right on cue, the knee-jerk jerkers in Maine are hard at it proposing worthless fascist-style bills, I suppose feeling the need to “do something.”

History is proving that nobody ever learns anything from history.

Here’s a peek at the four pieces of proposed legislation that made its way past the emergency bill standards of the Legislature.

One bill seeks a $20 million bond to be used to “make schools safer.” Yesterday I weighed in on that nonsense. All you need to do is simply trust your government. And how has that worked out for all of us so far?

A second bill, according to the Portland Press Herald, “…would set up a process for police to temporarily confiscate guns from a person whom a court has found to be a danger to the community.” Think about this for a moment. What could possibly go wrong? And do you want others more insane than you deciding whether or not you are a danger to “the” community? By whose standards will this claim of “danger” be based? This is fascism at its finest carried out and perpetuated by useless eater totalitarians. Just blindly, out of fear of government, cede all your rights away, is slavery in its purest form.

A third bill proposal, “…would seek to build community education programs to raise awareness of those who may be a danger to themselves or others.” Historically, the Vatican, and thus the infrastructure of the Catholic Church have always taught their followers to spy on other people and turn them in if they are not following the laws of their church. This proposal I see as no different.

Consider that this proposal would allow insane, brainwashed morons, to educate other brainwashed, insane morons how to recognize someone who is a “danger to themselves and others.” By someone’s standards, everyone can fit that description. Just look at the insanity that has prevailed since the presidential election. And, I must ask, who is mentally fit to educate others as to their own insanity? We have gone mad!!

And to further perpetuate the fascist nonsense by propping up and showing adoration for the mental health profession, a fourth bill will be considered that would give shrinks, with masters degrees or higher, access to loan forgiveness programs.

So the insane make the rules for the rest of us as to their industry’s standards of mental illness and mental normalcy, and Maine is considering propping up this industry that has proven to make us all even that much more insane, by paying off their debt so we can expect and eagerly await being forced to conform to the State’s standards of mental normalcy.

Smart! Real smart!

Share

Mental Health and “Gun Violence”

From Gary Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association:

Dear MSSA Friends,
All the talking heads are frothing over the Florida school shooting.  All this rabid attention only inspires copycat acts.
Of course school shootings and mass murder are terrible.  But, let’s ask some intelligent questions about what’s going on.
Many talking heads bring up various suggestions about mental health, from more taxpayer funding, to wider screening, to better record keeping and sharing, to using mental health evaluations to strip people of their civil rights.  So, what’s the deal with mental health and “gun violence”?  (I put “gun violence” in quotes because the issue is really about violence against people, by any method.  One of the largest mass murders in US history was done in a New York City nightclub with a quart of gasoline.)
Well, I have explored the intersection of mental health and gun violence.  I have written about that intersection and posted that Online.  Please review my analysis at:
There are important points in this analysis you need to be able to express to friends, elected officials, and in letters to the editor.
Why do most of these incidents happen in schools?  Well, duhhh!  “Gun free zones.”  I put that in quotes because these places are NEVER gun free.  They are only gun free for the law abiding victims.  But “gun free zones” are low-hanging fruit full of ripe, defenseless victims for a madman planning yet another copycat killing spree.
To cure this societal defect, MSSA proposed the Montana School Safety Act in the last session of the Montana Legislature, House Bill 385.  HB 385 would have allowed trained and qualified school employees to be armed at work, to protect themselves and our precious children and grandchildren.  See the bill copy at:
HB 385 didn’t pass.  Opponents said it’s just too dangerous to have guns in schools.  Leave defense of our children to the professionals, they said.  Oh, but keep the fire extinguishers in the buildings, they said, because the staff of a school with a beginning fire can’t wait for professional firefighters.  Yeah, right.
How bad can it get?  How many children could a madman shoot in the target-rich environment of a school?  Well, I tested that.  Read about and see videos of my test at:
It could be very bad – much worse than the recent shooting in Florida.
So, what’s the solution?  It certainly won’t prevent drunk driving to take cars away from sober people.  And, it won’t inhibit madmen to make it more difficult for law abiding people to purchase or own firearms.  That’s obvious.
One solution is to get rid of gun free zones – all of them.  They’re dangerous places and magnets for violent madmen.  When one of these incidents happens, what’s the first thing people on scene do?  They call for police.  Why call police?  It’s not because of the nifty clothes police wear, and not because of the fancy cars they drive, but because police have guns they can use to shoot the perpetrator.  The victims are calling for guns.  Why shouldn’t the intended victims have guns so they can shoot the perpetrator themselves rather than wait fatal minutes for police to arrive?
It seems that this problem of mass murder needs to be examined through the lens of sociology, rather than of law or psychology.  More gun control laws have not worked anywhere.  Calls for more or better mental health are likely to only obscure important aspects of the problem, and postpone workable solutions.
Enough rant.
Best wishes,
Share

Maine Governor Advocates for Stricter Gun Control Laws

It appears that Maine Governor Paul LePage has come out with recommendations that the existing laws on the books that severely rip apart our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, be strictly enforced and even beefed up. This is a classic example of fake “conservatives” pretending that they know what the term means while advocating for the smothering of individual rights and a destruction of your Second Amendment right.

LePage says that those who commit gun violence, “always have a relationship to either drugs, domestic violence or mental illness.” That may be so, or maybe not. However, drugs, domestic violence, and mental illness affects many aspects of everyone’s lives. If it is so important that these conditions are responsible for gun violence, then what is it that this fascist government is doing about drugs, domestic violence, and mental illness? Our society is nearly 100% dependent on prescription and over-the-counter drugs, pushed heavily through the media to ensure the addictions continue. It is said that mental illness appears more prevalent in our society only because of better detection. Really? Is it really a proper thing that any GI who seeks counseling, perhaps because of war distress, should be considered a mental problem and barred from owning a gun? Who gets to decide what mental disorders are and why they disqualify any individual from owning a gun? I see many in positions to make such decisions loonier than the patients they are condemning.

As a society, we promote violence in our media – movies, and music and just about everything we do in life. And yet, instead of addressing that problem, we think we can cure the domestic violence issue by severely limiting a person’s right to keep and bear arms.

While fake “patriots” pretend that they would never consider infringing on anyone’s right to free speech or freedom of expression (art, music, movies, video games, etc.) they think, evidently as Paul LePage does, that destroying the rights of law-abiding citizens to self-protection is a responsible thing to do; that somehow this will cure the drugs, domestic violence, and mental illness problems.

Fake Second Amendment advocates are the first to claim that taking away rights of law-abiding citizens is wrong, and yet this opinion piece of Governor LePage’s is a clear example of how one right is treated differently than all others. If drugs, domestic violence, and mental illness “always have a relationship” to gun violence, and you advocate for the destruction of the Second Amendment while doing nothing to address the other issues, thinking it’s a cure, you are an ignorant hypocrite.

Each time good-intentioned rights destroyers approach the Second Amendment with advocation of limited rights, the enforcement of the existing laws, and even strengthening the limits on rights, they are promoting gun control and are strong allies with the radical gun control fascists.

For the same reason gun control has no effect on criminals, gun control does nothing to stop drug abuse, mental illness, and domestic violence.

Time to give it a rest and begin strengthening our Second Amendment rights instead of looking for ways to further destroy them.

“The federal government must do a better job to provide adequate resources for background checks on people purchasing firearms.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

Vegas Blow Back: The Stupids Who Are Stupid About Stupid Stuff

Evidently acting as though you have lots of questions, while intimating a need for “more legislation” is a person’s way of pretending to not be eager to further destroy the Second Amendment and place themselves on a plane of being rational, lacking in “knee-jerk” reactions over, yet another, perhaps staged “disaster” involving guns.

Jim Shepherd writes in Outdoor Wire, that there are a lot of “questions” surrounding the events in Las Vegas. There are always a lot of questions that never go answered and that is the purpose of the event. Keep the masses petrified and they will do anything.

As is the usual, because guns were used to kill, guns are blamed and demand is made by stupids to ban guns, even if they know or have proof “gun control” doesn’t work. Times like this is what politicians love. They can show to their constituency how much they want to tell and act just as the brainwashed masses want, while doing what they do best by creating more stupid laws that only prove how stupid you are and how stupid anyone is who follows along.

Hidden within the discussion linked to above, is the topic of mental illness. WHAT A CAN OF WORMS!! The author seems to indicate that the failure of politicians to effectively address mental illness and guns might be the root of the problem. Consider the stupid (mentally ill), corrupt politicians deciding what is mental illness….at least the kind that would disqualify you from owning or using a gun – and that, in the minds of stupid people, would stop mentally ill people (anyone who would kill is mentally ill…period!) from picking up a gun, baseball bat, knife, car, etc. and killing somebody – and there is never a call to ban those other “weapons.”

Mental illness is a doctor giving anybody who wants them, chemicals, in the form of pills, to stop what “ails them.” Stupid people don’t know which came first – mental illness or chemical influences. Obviously the majority, along with the medical establishment, exist with the idea that chemicals can cure anything and refuse to honestly think chemicals alter the state of every person who chooses or is forced to take them (Yes, even aspirin).

But let’s not go there. We love our drugs and to go along with it, we want anyone who is “mentally ill” to not have a gun, because…..somebody said that would be a good idea. If only we could get those “mentally ill” people on more drugs. More, more, more……

An honest assessment should reveal, but doesn’t, to any honest person that the world has gone mad. Even those, who on the surface appear “sane,” have gone mad. We just are incapable of seeing the insanity we are mired in and thus nobody thinks of themselves as insane. We meet, we greet, we go about our daily thinking those we meet are normal. Until, we get into the nitty-gritty of their real constitution.

Whether one wants to accept the fact that our own government, more precisely those that control our government, orchestrates these “disasters” for political gain and ultimate control over the minds of people, more guns or less guns, more drugs or less drugs, more labeling of mental illness or less label, nothing will change.

There is but one answer and because so few seek the Truth, the only other alternative is what we see.

Run scared! Give Government what they want! You love your servitude and government control. You are insanely stupid and can’t tell the difference. Stupidity is blindly following the stupid people who create the stupid problems. Your faith and trust is in man. A big mistake.

That is the true definition of INSANITY!

Share

Shifting Paradigm: Changing How Gun Control is Discussed

*Editor’s Note* – Recall the old saying that if you put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.

A link to this article was posted on the Face Book page of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine – and I’m not sure I understand why. I certainly hope it was not because they endorsed the content of the interview with a “shrink” professor at a university.

At points here and there in the interview, the good professor makes some points about how mental illness is not necessarily the factor behind the causes of mass killings by deranged people. However, the overall tone of the interview is advocating for more government control and more government god-playing in making determinations as to who can and cannot own a gun based upon some god-man sitting in judgement over others of which he or she should never be given authority to do.

To present an interview that readers are led to believe is to “dispel” the “myths” of mental disorders and mass killing, when it is only shifting the paradigm and changing the way we discuss gun control, should be recognized for what it is and nothing more.

While we should advocate for a healthy society, one that includes a serious reduction in the promotion of violence, i.e video games, movies, music, etc., we will never eliminate the occasional nut job who wants to kill for whatever the reasons. I understand that there is always a certain risk to life no matter what I do or where I go. However, it should be MY CHOICE to be able to be prepared to protect myself from those rare instances if I DECIDE that the risk is great enough.

For many years there has always been topics of discussion as to why Americans should have a right taken from them to self protection and to prohibit tyranny. Now that the paradigm is shifting, thanks to ignorant people like Donald Trump who now want to make gun rights about mental health, don’t be fooled into believing that the desire of the anti-gun crowd has actually changed. Imagine that the government determines your Second Amendment “right” by making a determination on your state of mental health. Remember both sides of the fake Left and Right believe those of opposite ideology are mentally ill.

Whatever it takes to remove the threat of tyranny, the ruling elite will accomplish no matter how many fake shootings and psyops they create. Propping them up only accelerates the end result.

To separate the facts from the media hype, we talked to Dr. Jeffrey Swanson, a professor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Duke University School of Medicine, and one of the leading researchers on mental health and violence. Swanson talked about the dangers of passing laws in the wake of tragedy ? and which new violence-prevention strategies might actually work.

Here is a condensed version of our conversation, edited for length and clarity.

Source: Myths about mental health and violence, and what makes mass shootings more likely | BDN Maine

Share

Another Example of Human Perversion Of Protection of Animals Over Humans

People need to understand that this action by humans to protect predators, or any animal, over the protection of humans, their property and livelihoods is an extreme mental illness, a perversion that goes beyond normal comprehension. When will we get it?

“Wolf attacks have been particularly prevalent in the region over recent months, with this incident the 129th in 2015 so far. Nearly 300 sheep have been killed, with the Roquebillière area particularly affected.

“The [current] regulation is still not sufficient…if effective measures are not taken, our shepherds will disappear,” concluded Estrosi.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

S.F. Don’t Know How to Stop Woman Who Breeds, Releases Wolves Rats

SAN FRANCISCO — Authorities in San Francisco say their hands are tied when it comes to stopping a woman who has been breeding hundreds of rats in her home and then releasing them into public parks.<<<Read More>>>

Share