A curious thing happened on the way to freedom. It was taken by people with ‘good intentions.’
But good intentions are not always what they seem. The power of incrementalism is at work in the most recent unconstitutional action by the Obama administration; to ban persons on social security with mental issues from owning guns.
“Well,” you might ask, “what’s wring with that?”
Just like with other words we have an emotional reaction when someone says the words, mental illness; we see something different than reality. We see our greatest fear. We see a crazed lunatic shooting up a fast food joint or movie theater or black church.
Its like the words ‘rape’ or ‘sex offender.’ When we hear the word ‘rape’ we think of a man brutally assaulting a woman in a dark alley and then killing her. We don’t think of the girl who cheated on her boyfriend got caught and had to quickly make something up. Same with sex offender. A drunk guy taking a piss in an alley behind a bar at two AM can be forced to register as a sex offender.
So when we talk of mental illness, we should ask ourselves; what exactly is ‘mental illness?’ When you ask that question, you start to get the picture. Have you ever been depressed? For example, if your girl or guy dumped you in a crappy way, and you got mad about it or sad about it for a few days. By definition, you had depression and therefore you have a ‘mental illness.’
Someone who believes in an entity that doesn’t exist, with imaginary lines and rules, made up by people who know nothing of you; that you must follow or face the consequences, is clearly suffering from a mental illness. I’m not just talking about religion here, I’m talking about believing in a nation or nationhood.
This belief in an imaginary ‘state’ is universal. Belief in an imaginary man in the sky is almost universal as well. But take the words, government and religion out of the equation and you have the traditional definition of a serious mental illness.
A man walks up to you in the middle of the street and says, ‘there is a line in the road you can’t cross without permission of the ‘others.’ The same man says you must mind your behavior because, just above you is an invisible man that is judging your actions and even worse, he can see into your mind! You would think he is nuts right?
It goes further than this however, when you enter into the strictest definition of what is a guaranteed right. Does a person with mental illness lose their right to free speech? Religion? Press? To gather peacefully and petition the government for redress?
And that’s just the first amendment.
Does he or she lose their right to a trial by jury? Do they lose their right to avoid self incrimination? Can troops be quartered in their homes? Do they lose the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure? Oh, wait..we’ve all lost that one already thanks to the NSA.
Once you see it this way, (what other rights does a person with mental illness lose) there is no debate. Only a person who is so severely mentally ill that they are a danger to themselves or others; loses their other rights. Usually, they are hospitalized for an extended period of time and thus under complete observation. Others wind up homeless and unable to work and thus afford a gun.
The point is, just like the definition of rape, sex offender and even child abuse have been so watered down as to include just about anything; Obama’s attack on the gun rights of the elderly and disabled is a ruse to total gun control. The definition is so broad that you can pretty much expect everyone on social security, people who most of the time can’t physically defend themselves in the first place, to lose their right to keep and bear arm.
Aren’t democrats all about protecting the helpless? When then deny these people the right to defend themselves? Why leave them at the mercy of the criminal gangs and thugs?
Because once you have taken guns from them; you can justify taking guns from everyone else. And that my friends, is the ultimate goal.