@NRA I’d wager most of your members are adjudicated mentally incompetent.
Miss Tina @Miss__Tina
Tweeted on January 7, 2016
[This is what they think of you. If you don’t think like them you must be crazy and it’s off to the psych ward for you. It’s what Stalin did and it’s what they will do if they get the chance.—Joe]
I appreciate that at least it is not a small dick insult. One step better on her part.
Still, I’d wager I have more education and a stable family life, while other readers have more rich life experiences than her, that all show her hypothesis to be a lie.
Her assumption is that if we like firearms, we are de facto nut jobs and crazy as a mad hatter (from mercury poisoning). Well, her opinion matters not. If we ever need one of our firearms to protect ourselves, we will be vindicated. Miss Tina, like her unarmed fellow travelers, will be relying on the tender mercies of her attackers.
And this is their latest tactic. Kalifornia has passed it, and they are trying in Washington, Oregon, and others. Oregon’s proposed bill is so bad that the sponsors won’t even put their names on it.
To clarify, I am in California and they are not adjudicating them mentally incompetent. They are relying on a complaint that the person MIGHT be dangerous and has access to firearms and then a dopey judge can issue an order to seize all these firearms for 21 days. That is not due process.
Well, of course not. Due process is precisely what they do not want. The 14th amendment was eviscerated within years after its ratification.
This is just a variation on the recent “no fly list” scam. That’s another example of a no-due-process scheme for denying basic human rights.
The new “mental health” hype has a couple of components. First, abolish medical confidentiality, requiring doctors to disclose mental issues to the authorities. Second, having the quacks at CDC claim that gun ownership is a medical issue. From there, as this Tina character did, conclude that owning a gun, or wanting to own one, is evidence of a mental issue. From there, conclude that all persons who want a gun are medically disqualified.
Presto changeo, no more legal gun ownership.
Yep. And from what I’ve been seeing, a lot of gun owners will go right along with it. Just like Republicans, terrified of being called racist, will give Obama everything he wants and more, a huge number of gun owners and even gun rights groups will dive head first into this “keep guns out of the hands of crazy people” trap, even leading the way. The Progressives won’t have to do much at all, because the gun groups will do a lot of it for them.
It’s the best tactic the antis have come up with yet. It will gain them ground only with our help, which they will get. There’s not a Republican alive who won’t fall for this and be proud of it afterward, for example, and I’m guessing the NRA is drinking the Kool-aid eagerly.
Who wants to be known for trying to keep guns in the hands of crazy people? This is brilliant.
I don’t know the NRA well, but I’ve seen some articles calling it “the country’s largest gun control organization” and defending that label.
There is a term in psychology known as “progressive involvement”. Get people to do your bidding in some small way, get them accustomed to it and then ratchet it up and get people responding to you more deeply. Eventually you can turn people to your cause without them even knowing it.
Thus the “pro gun rights” arganizations will eventually be working for the antis, while they believe they’re fighting them. The “fights” will eventually all be over matters of the degree and speed of the destruction of the second amendment. The Republican Party has already been thusly co-opted 100%. Many of you reading this, though you would argue strenuously that I’m wrong, and get angry with me, are in some ways doing the bidding of the antis. It’s unavoidable. The most reliable marker or indicator that you’re being co-opted is that you get emotional.