Featured Post

Castro and the Nazis: Makes Perfect Sense

As we come up on the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, we see newly declassified German intelligence documents reporting that Fi...

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

Progressive "Lists" and Gun Ownership: Another Bit of Weirdness

This one will be quick.

Listening to the radio last night, I heard a very earnest progressive commentator talk about "sensible gun control." The number one item on his list was, of course, the mental health issue. Keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, but of course! I have dealt with that before, and you can go HERE to read my pearls of wisdom on the fallacy of that approach. This little excerpt from that piece sums it up pretty well, in my humble opinion,
If you think the science of global climate whatever is up in the air, wait until you delve into the looney world of mental health. The mental health profession is full of quack "therapists" and quack theories; few things there are settled science; and that profession is as subject to the vagaries of the winds and tides of fashion and politics as any other. Let us not forget the uses of psychiatry in the dead and unlamented Soviet bloc. Even, however, without going back to the USSR, I would point out that my father was a psychiatrist, and in his old Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals (DSM) homosexuality was listed as a disorder, "a sociopathic personality disturbance" to be precise. It was a disorder or mental disturbance until it just wasn't--you can read the account of how that change happened here
Would then those persons treated for homosexuality, and have that on their medical records, be denied their second amendment rights? This, in turn, leads to the raising of many other questions: What standards would be used to determine mental illness for the purpose of gun denial? Who would make those standards? How would authorities running a background check gain access to those medical records? How would we redefine the ancient notion of patient-doctor confidentiality? How would those mental health sessions be flagged in the Great Database? How would one prevent that information from leaking and from being used for political or blackmail purposes? How would this not dissuade people who need some help from getting it? I am sure you can think of dozens more questions.
The progs have added a couple of new twists to their "common sense" approach to gun control. One of my favorites, brought up by the commentator mentioned above, would ban what Obama has called "weapons of war" from ownership by civilians.

Weapons of War! As we gun nuts call them, WOW! What a great phrase: conjures up images of noisy smoky tanks, armored vehicles, Maxim guns, land mines, etc. But, no. Our progs are not talking about those. They, apparently, are talking about the sort of weapons used by the Muslim murderers in San Bernardino. Progs love coming up with catchy bumper sticker phrases. I hate to burst their little bubble, but what is the definition of a WOW? Which war, for example? As my son noted to me today, at one time a musket was a WOW. Am I denied the right to a musket? How about swords, knives, chains, rocks, sticks, fists, and feet? All of those have been used in wars. The weapons used by the Muslim murderers, in fact. were not WOWs. As far as I can tell, the military do not use AR-15s. No. The progs don't care about that; they, clearly, are going to define whatever they want as a WOW--much like they have with "assault rifle." In other words, if it's scary to a prog, then, by definition, it's a WOW. I have served in countries where 9mm and .45 are declared military weapons (parabellum, for war) and are denied to civilians. In one country, 9mm was forbidden for civilians, but not .38 or .357. I don't pretend to understand those sort of calls. To repeat, any weapon at any time can be declared a WOW, and, hence, banned under prog "common sense" gun control.

Yet another cry has gone up: Ban people on the "terror list" from buying weapons! Common sense, no? I am not exactly sure what "terror list" the progs are bandying about. I know of "no-fly" lists, and as a DCM in some rough places, I helped put together Visa Viper lists of people who should be denied visas to the US. The process of making up these lists is highly inexact and subjective. Just getting names right is a major ordeal. The process consists of coffee-drinking bureaucrats sitting around a table with incomplete and perhaps inaccurate information from a variety of open and covert sources of varying reliability making judgement calls. There is no due process; no elevated standards of evidence; and it is almost impossible to correct mistakes. At least our Visa Viper list was aimed only at pesky foreigners. The sort of list the progs are talking about is aimed at American citizens--and, by the way, the Muslim murderers in San Bernardino were on no list.

So should a list drawn up in secret by bureaucrats responding to who knows what political agendas and masters with no due process, no right of appeal, be used to deny Constitutional rights? I wonder about that, eh? Tough call . . .. Let's put it this way: Do you trust Obama, who has used the IRS and EPA, for example, to go after political opponents, to draw up a list to deny people their rights? We all know, of course, that the list-makers will be tasked with ensuring that the list is diverse and does not overly target any protected group . . .  If the government is so sure about this "list," why not arrest and try the people on it? What's next? Lists to deny freedom of speech and religion? Why stop with guns? So many questions.

Amazing, ain't it? The same crowd who get weepy over a handful of blacklisted Communist screenwriters, and outraged over Trump's call to halt Muslim immigration to the US, now want government drafting secret lists to deny people their rights. Progressives . . .


91 comments:

  1. Secret lists drawn up by unaccountable government minions are the stock in trade of today's leftist. But fear not: it is all for our own good, because someone has to think of the children.

    Trump is making leftie heads explode all over the world; it is beautiful to behold.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trump's not my first choice, but God bless him: he is forcing the Western world to confront the progressive hypocrisy and nonsense that rule us.

      Delete
    2. Totalitarians always signal their intentions. Guns are the "big one" for them.

      Delete
    3. http://bustednuckles.blogspot.com/2015/12/attention-gun-grabbers-your-mission-has.html

      Correct. and they do not have a chance in hell of taking them from us.
      Molon Labe
      leaperman

      Delete
    4. Brett: No wonder. Think of all those idols of Leftists Past: Stalin (Nooooo! Pact with Hitler!), Mao, nguyen-cum-Ho, Castro, Neanderthal Guevara (oops, didn't mean to insult the Neanderthals).

      Dip, as for Trump, I'm developing a suspicion that his candidacy is returning some business favor (probably shady) given him by the Billary when they were in the White House. He hopes to split the GOP vote so the execrable, corrupt, incompetent as SecState, always stays one jump ahead of the law Shrillary Shroooooo can get elected.

      Frankly, if Trump wins the GOP nomination, I may well vote Constitution Party or Libertarian in protest.

      Learned Hand, the famous NY jurist, wrote that if liberty dies in the hearts of the people, no constitution, legal system, or whatnot will save it. The first few years of Shrillary's administration will show whether or not liberty has died in the hearts of the American people. If it has, and that execrable hag is not Watergated or destroyed by events (or, perhaps muddles through a single term because God looks after drunkards, fools, little children, and the USA), I'll prepare to spend my last years as an underground organizer of house churches or something.

      Yes, it is pretty sickening to see the progs weep rivers of tears over Hollywood creeps who sold their souls to Stalin for irredeemable scrip and Islamicist goons who might somehow be barred from entry loving secret lists of political enemies.

      Delete
  2. I wonder how much screaming they'd do if we put Boingo and all the RATS on a list, to track, when their asses are booted out of public service? Think they'd be as enthusiastic as now??

    ReplyDelete
  3. Universities have lent their credibility to the social crazies (though on their home turf, they call themselves scientists).
    Hundreds of years of fantastic scientific achievement and all the credibility that's been built up, is now being tossed into the flames.

    Global warming is no more predictable than when the next triple crown will be won, and that's *way* more solid than 'mental health'. Don't get me wrong, there are people out there who clearly need help. Help them. Get their families and friends involved... this state usurpation has to stop.

    - reader #1482

    ReplyDelete
  4. The link to the essay on how homosexuality was de-pathologized (I've read that it was a purely political decision) appears to have suffered from link-rot. Can you provide an alternate path to the relevant piece?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry. Here's a pretty good explanation of the politics involved: http://www.behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/

      Delete
    2. 'Narcissistic Personality Disorder" has been removed, too

      Delete
  5. The Zeroth Law of Gun Control: he who calls for gun control while himself being guarded by armed men is a crook.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Since Obama took office, there have been over 100 million guns sold in this country. Crime hasn't been lower in decades.
    http://bustednuckles.blogspot.com/2015/12/attention-gun-grabbers-your-mission-has.html

    what leftist idiots.
    leaperman

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not zero.... like it is in heaven...err London... errr Paris... oh crap.. somebody has that example place that doesn't have crime because there's no guns? What was it Gondor?

      - reader #1482

      Delete
  7. They don't really want to pay all that much attention to mental health. Otherwise they might have to face the possibility that their beloved stoners might not have clean hands. Recreational drug use does not mitigate or remedy mental health problems.

    Handling the dangerous mentally ill was not a simple or easy matter before the left screwed things up further by meddling in half a dozen areas.

    Anti-Democrat

    ReplyDelete
  8. Those very same "Weapons of War" with their extremely high capacity magazines are issued to police and state/federal agents for use against the good citizens of the town, city state, USA.

    They then claim that we should not fear the government as the government is us.

    "We call the social apparatus of compulsion and coercion that induces people to abide by the rules of life in society, the state; the rules according to which the state proceeds, law; and the organs charged with the responsibility of administering the apparatus of compulsion, government."
    --Mises, Ludwig von, Liberalism (pp. 35-36).

    "When we're saying "the government should intervene," we're saying "an organization with guns should threaten to lock people in cages if they don't comply with its dictates." "
    --Art Carden, Econlog

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Would then those persons treated for homosexuality, and have that on their medical records, be denied their second amendment rights?"

    But of course. Everybody else would, too. And that's the whole idea. If they can't get it all at once, they'll take it a step at a time.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "...as a DCM in some rough places, I helped put together Visa Viper lists of people who should be denied visas to the US. The process of making up these lists is highly inexact and subjective."

    As someone who worked downstairs on the visa line administering the laws and policies handed down from above all the way up to the Congress of these United States, I understand perfectly!

    I once had a Pakistani resident of Thailand immigrating on a petition for an alien parent. His name was **##### Khan** (changed slightly to protect the innocent). Guess how many Pakistani and other nationality low-lifes by the name of ##### Khan appeared on the visa lookout system we had in place back then? Not all of them had DOB or other identifying info other than name and [ostensible] nationality. If you're cautious, you'll have a string of Congressional nastygrams coming in (with concomitant superiors' fingers wagging in your very junior face) coming in; if you take a chance that this little old man who's father to some immigrant engineer who's made good really turns out to be an opium-growing Pashtun thug, you're also in trouble. Cases like this you simply can't win.

    And I pity my colleague working in Latin America who, working on a similar case with a guy named Juan Garcia Hernandez (or some other common Spanish name), has to check the watch list! Or those in a Francophone country dealing with a Jacques Duclos!

    One other thing that struck me, I'm sure that the government of the Chinese People's Republic would gladly supply us a list of people whom it considers dangerous for strictly political reasons [and able to provide a cooked legal case proving terrorist connections], while these same persons might bear the USA no ill will and might even have a positive view of us. I suspect that some on our side may have had things like this in mind when they screened in the Tsarnaevs. After all, I'm sure that back in the late 1940's, the Soviets would've a long, ugly, and largely false screed on Abdurakhman Avtorkhanov, a Chechen defector who helped us start Radio Free Europe and became a go-to guy on the Soviet state.

    Further, after leaving the Foreign Service and taking a Ph,.D. in political science, I've reached the unhappy conclusion that a lot of "data-based" research in social "science" and ejjumikashun (my current racket) is "cooked" somewhere along the line to either push an agenda, cover someone's a%$e, or both.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And that's all great until someone with a fake address pops up. Would you issue a visa?

      Delete
    2. Given extremely limited investigative resources and the need to employ such resources as available with extreme judiciousness, how would I know the applicant's address is fake?

      Delete
  11. OT - I am very angry. Someone was able to come into this country, that gave a nonexistent address, and no one one caught it? What the hell is going on at the State Dept? The person that put their signature on that visa should be fired.I am so terribly sick of this. If the personnel do not have enough time to properly vet those wanting to come to our country then, they should be given more time. Coming to the US is a privilege, not a mandate. But if those that perform these jobs for the US are incompetent then they should be fired. It has been a long, long time since I have heard of anyone being fired from the Federal Government.
    How about we start with everyone involved with letting the Saudi/Pakistani female shooter into the country? Let's start there...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Babs: You're right about a lot. However, the Bureau of Consular Affairs (or whatever has replaced it since I was at State) has always been something of a "weak sister", its turnover of personnel high, and the investigative resources it needs to do a lot of its jobs few. Its people on the visa line and in Citizens' Services are always under pressure to clear the day's caseload, so most interviewing is by necessity perfunctory. None of its higher-ups will ever be promoted for telling the truth about the situation on the ground, but only by buffaloing about how efficient he and his people are.

      Delete
  12. Hey, get a job in the civilian economy(after you are fired from the Federal gravy train) and see how great your dental benefits are...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My wife was a Federal employee. We had fairly good health insurance, but definitely NO dental benefits. OTOH, there is a large computer company in town that has really excellent eye care included in its benefit package. (The president's brother is an ophthalmologist.)

      Delete
  13. If you think the science of global climate whatever is up in the air, wait until you delve into the looney world of mental health.

    ReplyDelete
  14. This kind of thing is why I'm also tired of the GOP. The GOP is quite capable of enacting a law that, in their hands is used somewhat responsibly. However, that same law, in the hands of a tyrannical bureaucracy under a different administration is weaponized. Then, when a new GOP administration is installed, that same law is never done away with, nor are the malefactors from the previous administration punished.

    My point being that I don't care which administration creates these lists, no government should be able to create extra-judicial lists for citizens and any government official who does should be swiftly and severely punished.

    -Blake

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, that's why I think a conservative's default position should be NO to new programs by the government no matter how well intended. The progressives are the masters of governmental bureaucracies and will inevitably twist any program into a weapon for their agenda.

      Delete
    2. Agreed. I wonder if the most recent DSM still has "gender dysphoria" listed ? Now, it's called Transgender or some similar euphemism.

      Delete
    3. I should have called our country what it currently is, which is the "Tyranny of the Bureaucracy."

      Get on the wrong side of a government agency and they will use the unlimited resources of the State to bankrupt you and, if possible, throw you in jail.


      -Blake

      Delete
  15. the list, which was a horrible terrible thing when there was a republican president, but is now ok...

    "Do you trust Obama to..."

    No, end of story.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  22. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  23. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  25. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  28. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  29. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  30. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  31. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  32. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  33. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  34. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  35. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  36. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  37. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  38. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  39. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  40. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  41. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  42. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  43. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  44. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  45. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  46. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  47. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  48. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  49. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  50. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  51. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  52. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  53. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  54. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  55. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  56. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  57. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  58. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  59. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  60. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  61. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  62. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  63. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  64. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  65. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  66. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  67. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  68. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  69. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  70. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  71. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  72. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  73. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete