Via Matthew Bracken @ Matt_Bracken:
The abuse of psychiatry was legendary:
See also Political abuse of psychiatry in the Soviet Union.
Expect little difference if implemented here. What is going to be the default decision of a judge or psychologist? Risk letting a potential mass shooter keep their guns or risk an nonviolent person losing their guns?
And don’t expect the left to show any gratitude for compromises we make. They will still hate us and think that we should be exterminated.
I made almost this same observation over on Quora this morning.
I really hate where things seem to be going, liberty-wise, in this country.
The constitution is quite clear on this subject: “… shall not be infringed”. That doesn’t mean “shall not be re-interpreted”, it means “Don’t Tread On Me!”
You can’t TOUCH that Constitutional Right. You can’t RE-INTERPRET it in a manner which undermines the basic Right to “keep and bear arms”. ( which means “Own it and Carry it!”)
No law (municipal, state or federal) which “infringes” upon any Constitutional RIGHT is a legal law … especially a Right which specifically states “… shall not be infringed”!. Unconstitutional bills which are enacted at ANY level are not legal laws and need not be obeyed, as there is no legal consequences for disobeying an illegal law.
And yes, local lawyers have broken that pact thousands of times over the past 200 years, and will again. That’s what happens when Citizens are not willing to stand up for their rights.
“The constitution is quite clear on this subject”
“What difference at this point does it make?” — Hillary
Politicians have disregarded, disrespected, and trampled on the Constitution just about from the point when the ink on it dried. See St. George Tucker’s book on the subject, published in 1803.
Same commie BS. With a data / tracking base that would make the east German Stasi blush! Ya, sporty no doubt it will be!
The Stasi blushing wasn’t what came to my mind. Something signifying more enthusiastic envy.
“What is going to be the default decision of a judge or psychologist? Risk letting a potential mass shooter keep their guns or risk an nonviolent person losing their guns?”
It’s brilliant strategy, isn’t it? The leftists agitators are always several steps ahead of us.
And of course the politicians will feel they’re under the same pressures, including Republicans, and they’ll eventually pass some national Red Flag Laws. They’ve been wanting this for some time, and all they need are more mass shootings. They’ll get it done for sure, and it won’t have mattered one little bit who or what you’ve voted for.
Trump for example will have openly and angrily turned on gun owners by the time he’s done, adopting the radical left’s position that second amendment rights = mass death of innocents. All of our rights do in fact come with a body count, and so it’s pretty easy; just exagerate the body count of liberty, while ignoring the body count of authoritarianism.
Any elementary school kid could come up with this kind of stupid trick, but as a society we fall for it almost every time because we hold to no permanent standard.