Thursday, January 17, 2013

Gun Control and Mental Health

Depression is a condition I have had to contend with for most of my life. I also own guns. I have never considered using one of my guns on myself or on another. Never. But with the executive orders signed by president Obama concerning gun control I now doubt I will ever seek medical help for my depression ever again. Why? Because I fear my gun ownership will be reported to the government and used as an excuse to confiscate them.

One of the executive actions states "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes." What is to be used with this information? Will doctors be required to report this information? And if they are, is there a burden of proof required to determine that you are a threat to yourself or others? Or does the fact that you seek help, and own guns, make you a threat and therefore reportable?

Some of the executive orders were so vague they have no meaning. One stated "Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks." What is a dangerous person? Is it anyone that owns a gun and seeks medical help for a mental or emotional condition?

I had trouble sleeping last night as the scenario of armed police raiding my house in the middle of the night to take my guns. I have visions of members of my family being gunned down by the very people sent to "protect me from myself or others". (Just Google what happens during SWAT raids of homes where guns are present so see what I mean). 

Maybe this is all just a knee-jerk reaction by me. But It seems that tying medical care to law enforcement will make people think twice about seeking help for mental and emotional conditions out of fear of involving the authorities, resulting in men with guns visiting your home in the middle of the night.


Why do we blame the lobbyists when it's the politicians that take the money?

Gun Control

We have forgotten the real purpose of having guns.

Friday, January 4, 2013

Homicide Rates vs. Gun Ownership

Sorted By Homicide Rate
Sorted By Guns per Citizen

172 Countries Sorted By Homicide Rate

172 Countries Sorted By Guns per Citizen

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Of God and Government

Have we replaced God with Government?

I notice that as we become less dependent on a god we seem to become more dependent on a government. Is there really any difference? Is putting your faith in a government really that much different than putting your faith in a god? Is not the very things we rejected in religion the very things we tend to worship in government?

The President

Religion had been defined as the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power. Is that not what we now do with government? We feel that government is a superhuman controlling power able to take away our ills, solve all our problem, and offer us salvation.

Why do I bring this up? Because I see a lot of self proclaimed atheists that complain about the evils of religion. They will tell you all about how religion is nothing more than a way of controlling people, and how it stifles free thought and free will. But I see these same atheists complain that government is not doing enough for us. That government is not controlling us enough. That we need a superhuman controlling power to direct our lives. That we need that power to command us how to think and act.

The Capitol Building
Like religion, government too has it's temples, it's priests, it's rituals. We feel that because someone puts on the priestly robes of the state that they somehow have authority over us, that they must be obeyed. Do government buildings not look grand and imposing? Not unlike a church. Are we not conditioned to perform the rituals of the state? To tithe in the form of taxes?

The Vatican

Is the ballot box not the alter of the state? A place we go to pray to get our way and impose our will on others, not for liberty, but for our own selfish ends. When we go to vote we select the politician that promises us the most, the law that satisfies our own personal needs the best. We pray to our politicians, as if they are high priests. We ask them for deliverance. We recite the laws as if they were scribed in some sacred holy text.

When we walk into a court room, do you not somehow feel you are in a church? Feel in awe of the grandeur of it all. You must stand when ordered to, sit when ordered to, and speak to the judge as if he were conducting a state mass. We must know, and be able to recite chapter and verse of the holy government scriptures. To question any of the procedures is akin to questioning god.

We let government send our young off to die in unneeded wars, without question, because to question would be blasphemy. We do not fight for the defense of our country anymore, we fight in holy wars in the name of "spreading Democracy", the new religion. It is no different than the Crusades of the past. Our soldiers are nothing more than fodder, to be chewed up in the advance of the religion of the state. Martyrs.

We let government tell us what we can eat, how to run our businesses, who we can and can't marry, how and when we can defend ourselves, how our children are taught. We are willing to accept this without question by calling it the "will of the people". Since when has fifty one percent of the people been by will? Why should I accept this as if it were gospel? I am an atheist, I worship nothing.

The Black robed priests of the state.
At least with religion you can choose not to participate, choose not to accept the myths. Just try that with government and see what happens. The armed priests of the state, robed in their government issued costumes, will show up at your doorstep and haul you away as a heretic.

There was a time in this country where government had but one purpose, to protect our liberty. What happened?

Friday, May 21, 2010

Dear right to health care advocate

From Bill Holmes:

"If you have the right to take from some to pay the medical bills of others, then you forfeit your rights to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The dialogue at the time involved Locke and the right to own and protect property, and have the liberty to use it as the necessity for the sustenance of life. "The pursuit of happiness" was substituted for "property" in the Declaration of Independence to eliminate the possibility that some would presume government was to provide property.

A government instituted to protect life, liberty and the pursuit of property as the means to happiness would work if it is limited to that purpose, which the Constitution and is "balance of powers" sought to establish. Unfortunately, the supreme court became politicized, and its "living constitution" premise unleashed government to do the inverse of its original intent. Government now extorts property, constrains your liberty to use it, and enslaves some people to others, e.g. emergency medical personnel to anyone. See with regard to property as the natural order of all things.

If people don't pay for their own health, vehicle, home, investment, etc. care, then they will not learn from their mistakes, and will continue to engage in bad behavior. Why self-educate and be careful when government will force someone else to pay for fraud as well as your mistakes?

You will soon run out of other peoples money, because those not in a privileged government group will flee or decrease their income to become a member of a privileged government group to survive.

As costs escalate and income decreases, government will enact more laws controlling behavior to reduce cost, like regulating what you can swallow, inhale, inject or wear (helmets) and how long you can live. Soon no one will be happy except the political class with all the exceptions, like CONgress persons and their special health care and retirement.

Myopia can be dangerous."

Well said Bill.