That of course was its only purpose from the outset, so we’ll have to call the program a complete success.
What?– You believed the stuff about “protecting public safety”? No, see, that’s the just the selling point. That’s that charming, handsome man with his arm in a cast, Ted Bundy, asking you get in his van. Forget the assertions. The actual goal is something else entirely. That’s how communists (and serial killers) roll. It’s always a ruse.
Lyle
April 6, 2012
Comment to Gun card chaos: FOID foibles in IL
In response to “The only success of FOID cards is the successful persecution of gun owners.”
[Many, perhaps even most, of the people advocating for restrictions on firearms believe it will improve public safety. But at the top they know better. I’ve been listening to them and even meeting them face to face for many, many, years. Listen to and read carefully the words of gun control politicians Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, and Bill Clinton. Listen and read carefully the words of the top leaders of the anti-gun activists. The smart articulate ones. Not the rambling incoherent ones. They know the truth. They know it’s not about public safety. It’s about buying votes, gaining power, and control of the general population.
For a long time I have wanted to get a meme started, “What is the real reason?” But apparently we are not quite ready to ask that question. And for the population at large, and gun control advocates in particular, gun ownership laws are not something that is subject to reason.—Joe]
But apparently we are not quite ready to ask that question.
Who isn’t ready to ask that question?
I think that many of us in the gun rights community have been asking that question in various forms for years.
The problem is that the people who aren’t in the community, who aren’t involved and informed and active, aren’t ready to ANSWER the question in an honest, logical and straightforward way.
Just by even ASKING the question we tend to be dismissed as conspiracy theorists and nuts, even among those who ostensibly support or general positions.
People simply don’t want to believe that their government could be capable of such nefarious purposes so they don’t want to hear it. They don’t want to see the evidence. They don’t want to think about the ramifications. All they know is that they are being assured, with broad smiles and pats on the back, that it’s perfectly OK to get in that van…”don’t worry, I won’t hurt you”. And they WANT to believe it, so they do.
@Lyle:
I like your analogy of the charming, handsome man with his arm in a cast: Ted Bundy.
Most lowly elected officials are Snakes in Suits. Each is a Ted Bundy. Though better dressed, and able to navigate the political ladder, this species of high-level elected politician is a Ted Bundy.
Being an egotistical psychopath isn’t just limited to corporate leaders, elected leaders fit the suit just as well.
Excellent movie: I am at BrainBang.info.
Mention of Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, and Bill Clinton . . . now I’m all riled up. Usually, I can only take each of their names in small doses. But now my stomach is turning.
All these Snakes in Suits sicken me.
Y’all have inspired me to post a new poll at BrainBang,
http://www.BraingBang.info …
Poll: Which sociopath should be allowed to own a gun?
___ Rod Blagojevich, regardless of the fact that he’s in prison and a judge ordered confiscation of his Illinois Firearm Owner ID (FOID) card
___ Hillary Clinton (without a FOID card, but with a National Instant Criminal Background Check)
___ Donald Trump with a new hairstyle
Go here to vote:
http://www.BrainBang.info
@ Sarah Connor;
“Being an egotistical psychopath isn’t just limited to corporate leaders, elected leaders fit the suit just as well.”
Absolutely. I started watching the vid you had posted, but didn’t finish it. I was suspicious of the title in the first place, thinking it would be yet another slam against private markets.
Psychopaths should not be considered as “just limited to” anything. Now; the difference between a corporate phychopath and a government psychopath is vast and critically important. A corporation can’t make and enforce laws. It can’t force you to buy its products for example. People outside of government who try to do that sort of thing are called “gangsters” and we go after them. It is only when government becomes corrupt, and works together with psychopaths elsewhere that things get out of hand. To put it simply;
A private psychopath has to abide by the same rules as regular citizens, or they’re criminals. A government psychopath IS the law (in his mind) and can do damage and destruction on a biblical scale before anyone will act to stop him, and typically even that is only done through violent revolution, after much pain, stagnation, decline, destruction and violence has already ensued.
The “smart” government psychopath will get by swimingly for years and years without so much as a second thought from most of the public, because he doesn’t push the control and confiscation beyond certain practical limits. The Republican vs. Democrat psychopathic government has worked very, very well for generations, and they’ve raked in trillions of dollars for themselves and their friends while we’ve largely gone along with the ruse thinking ourselves good citizens.
Today what we have is something different. It’s morphed into a punative operation. Now they want to mess us up, hard, out of a sense of vengence. That’s what “Social and Economic Justice” means. It refers to a debt, in their minds, that has yet to be paid. They are angry and they hate us, so not only do they want to feed off of us, they want to hurt us too, for hurt’s sake. This is relatively new terrority for the United States.
And the Ted Bundy reference? That wasn’t mine. For example, it’s been almost 20 years now since John Ross brought it up in his book, Unintended Consequences. It’s an excellent comparison. Bundy was LOVED by the women who met him. Such a nice young man, but then they practically orgasmed at the sight of Alolf Hitler too. Tolken made a similar reference in his “Saruman’s Voice” chapter in Lord of The Rings, though they left it out of the movie. The BBC mini series, The Charmer is of the same exact nature (highly recommended too – seriously – watch it. For myself I was immediately reminded of Bill Clinton).
The more correct term here is actually sociopath, not psychopath. I had a doc friend of mine point out that obumble meets something like 15 out of 17 of the criteria for being a sociopath per the dictionary of psychological disorders. Of course the problem is that he combines that with being a narssisist.
@Lyle:
Unintended Consequences has been on my to-read list for years. Your post just inspired me to move it up to #1. I’m in search of the audio book or ebook.
“Absolutely. I started watching the vid you had posted, but didn’t finish it. I was suspicious of the title in the first place, thinking it would be yet another slam against private markets.”
Lyle, give the video, I am as a slam against private markets.
It’s not saying all corporate leaders are psychopaths. talks about *why* psychopaths are allured into positions of power.
Towards the end of, this is what I found inspiring:
– Except for a small percentage of psychopaths in society, most people are good.
– People need networks. We are influenced by those close to us.
– An exceedingly high percentage of psychopaths are corporate leaders and gov’t leaders.
– Those people do bad things. Horrible things. Very Bad Things.
– It’s our duty to defy, instead of comply to, those Very Bad People, so kindness becomes the norm, happily ever after, ideally.
– Reject the bad seeds by bumping them out, avoiding association with them, starting on a very local, interpersonal level.
– Gravitate towards the good folk. Create your community of kindness.
What does all this have to do with guns?
The vast majority of us gunfolk are good, kind people. We should spread that kindness. On the most basic level, teach someone basic gun safety skills. Or, take it a notch higher, and take a newbie to the range. And that’s just hands-on beginner stuff.
In the big picture of psychopath-prevention, it’s important to educate ourselves about psychopathic characteristics. It’s also vital to learn self-defense, including how to use a gun.
As for the other video, The Psychopath Test, right around run time 6:05 they start to delve into psychopathy in high-level government leaders.
@emdfl: Your post is correct. Thanks for the input. I’ll soon blog about the differences between sociopath and psychopath, because the terms are related, but not interchangeable. To be continued . . .
@Joe — I challenge you on this:
“For a long time I have wanted to get a meme started, “What is the real reason?” But apparently we are not quite ready to ask that question. And for the population at large, and gun control advocates in particular, gun ownership laws are not something that is subject to reason.”
Why do you think we’re not ready to ask what’s the real reason for gun control? What will indicate that we are ready?
Logical discussion of the real reason for gun control has been going on for years.
Gun control advocates hardly represent the population at large. But gun-grabbing organizations are quite talented at getting the most bang for their buck — it’s called “marketing.”
Which is something lanarchists (libertarian anarchists) and anacaps (anarcho-capitalists) don’t seem to grasp for themselves. The term “free-market” has “market” is built right into the name, but they typically suck at embracing… marketing.
Harsh reality.
It’s not about asking what the real reason is, behind gun-control. It’s time to start packaging RKBA side in a better way via marketing. Good marketing. Marketing done right.
The reason I don’t think we are ready to start asking that question is that it always seems to go nowhere when I suggest we start asking it. Perhaps it is bad marketing.
@Sarah Connor, So can you devise a marketing plan and implement it?
Yeah, Sarah, lots of folks don’t know the difference. The funny was that my friend and I got into obumble as we were talking about rahm emanuel. HE flatly hits all the markers for being a socio. Obumble was a narcissist/borderline socio who probably dropped over the edge after being surrounded by socios for most of his life. And socios often gravitate toward narcissists because narcies are easily controlled by socios.
@Joe:
My bold emphasis added. . .
The reason I don’t think we are ready to start asking that question is that it always seems to go nowhere when I suggest we start asking it. Perhaps it is bad marketing.
No need to suggest we start asking it. *You* ask it, no suggestion or approval needed. And really, there isn’t a Big Question to ask. There are facts and statements to be made.
As for a creating a marketing plan and implementing it? Sure. I have a wealth of ideas, but the machine tends to tick faster when there’s money behind the marketing.
Joe, and readers: What are the most challenging/frustrating messages you can’t seem to get across to the “other side?”
I was a bit feisty above, but I do sincerely hope to hear what frustrates pro-gunners the most, when you struggle to get your point across to the unconvinced.
Call my inquiry “marketing research.”
I love guns just as much as the next woman, but I’m always open to hearing the perspective of seasoned bloggers . . .
Thanks.
: )
@Sarah Conner, not too fiesty. I’m very busy right now with a lot of things going on. I’ll think more about this later.