Trump Suggests “Common Sense” Gun Control, “Deranged” People Shouldn’t Have Guns

Fuck that lying piece of shit

With Trump’s anti-gun position, Trump will surpass Obama for the “Greatest Gun Salesman” award.

This is precisely the methods used by the Soviet Union when critics of the government were deemed mentally ill and forced into “treatment” where they remained or where “re-educated/medicated” into conformity.

But abuse of psychiatry and the mental health/law enforcement meld is by no means unique to the Soviet Union. The mechanisms are already in place in the United States and have been for some time. Indeed, every day in the United States countless people are forcibly hospitalized having committed no crime whatsoever.

In her article, “The Crime Of Thinking Different,” Wendy McElroy wrote in September 2014,

The term “psychopathological mechanisms” of dissent describes the political abuse of psychiatry in the former Soviet Union and other totalitarian regimes. Non-approved beliefs, attitudes or behavior are classified as mental problems, which converts them into a medical diagnosis that can be handled in an extra-legal manner. Dissenters or ‘the different’ can be detained indefinitely in mental hospitals where they are drugged or otherwise ‘cured’ into conformity.

If accurate, a news story out of Cambridge, Maryland, in late August indicates “psychopathological mechanisms” is in full swing within the US. On August 22, a 23-year-old middle school teacher named Patrick McLaw was placed on administrative leave and taken into custody by police to be psychologically evaluated.

Why? The first reports stated, “Members of the Dorchester Sheriff’s Office, the Cambridge Police Department and…County Public School board have removed…McLaw for allegedly penning two books under the alias, ‘Dr. K.S. Voltaer’.” A police investigation is underway. [Note: the word “alias” connotes crime; “pen name” is the appropriate term for anonymous authorship.]

One novel, The Insurrectionist (2011), is set 888 years in the future and revolves around a school shooting. The Amazon blurb explains, “On 18 March 2902, a massacre transpired on the campus of Ocean Park High School…the largest school massacre in the nation’s history. And the entire country now begins to ask two daunting questions: How? and Why?…It becomes evident that the hysteria is far from over.” (The second novel, Lillith’s Heir, is a sequel.) The Amazon description is correct. The hysteria was just beginning.

The police searched McLaw’s home for weapons; none were found. They searched the school with dogs for bombs and guns; none were found. McLaw apparently does not have a criminal record. According to a local paper, The Star Democrat (April 23), he was nominated last April for Dorchester County’s “Teacher of the Year” award but lost out. Nevertheless, on September 1, Sheriff James Phillips stated that the teacher-novelist “is no longer in the area. He is currently at a location known to law enforcement and does not currently have the ability to travel anywhere.”

After a blitz of media coverage raised constitutional issues, the story offered by authorities changed. The novels became only “pieces of the puzzle” of their investigation. The State Attorney for Wicomico County Matt Maciarello now claims that McLaw drew police attention due to “a four-page letter to officials in Dorchester County.” The 4-pages were apparently a letter of resignation. In a highly unusual and prejudicial move, personal details from the letter were leaked although the authorities will not produce the document itself for independent verification. They will merely leak what is to their advantage.

Bottom line: No arrest was made, no charges were laid, no warrant has been issued and there has been no public accusation that McLaw threatened anyone. He is being held for psychiatric evaluation based merely on the fact that the police are investigating him for what or what may not be a crime.

The prevalence of “psychopathological mechanisms” is a touchstone of totalitarianism and a measure of how far a society or situation has distanced itself from liberty. Through American history, the distance from liberty has been an ebb and flow.

From its inception as colonies, the United States has included the political abuse of those who are seen as psychologically deviant. Between early 1692-1693, at least twenty people died because they were accused of violating the orthodox beliefs of authorities; they were called witches which may be as close to a psychiatric diagnosis as that period offers.

The most totalitarian situation or institution America has known was slavery; only the current prison system compares. During this period, the abuse of psychiatry revealed a second purpose; it not only provides social control but also justifies savagery in the eyes of those who commit it.

Consider the psychiatric term “drapetomania.” It refers to a mental illness defined in 1851 by a respected American doctor named Samuel A. Cartwright in order to explain why slaves ran away. His essay Diseases and Peculiarities of the Negro Race stated that fleeing slavery “is as much a disease of the mind as any other species of mental alienation, and much more curable, as a general rule.” The recommended cure was “whipping the devil out of” slaves as a preventative measure against those who display signs of this impending mental illness.

In his 2010 book The Protest Psychosis: How Schizophrenia Became a Black Disease, psychiatrist Jonathan Metzl explored the 1960 history of the Ionia State Hospital for the Criminally Insane (Michigan), which is now a state prison. The hospital was notorious for diagnosing blacks who advocated civil rights with schizophrenia and confining them for treatment. Treatments could become de facto lifelong sentences without legal recourse. Along with many other state asylums, the hospital was justly closed down during what is called “an era of deinstitutionalization” in the 1970s which came as a result of outrage over the brutal use of psychiatry as social control.

Such use has been gradually increasing. Metzl ascribes much of the increase to successive changes in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) which is published by the American Psychiatric Association. First published in 1952, it is considered to be the definitive guide to mental illness but its definition of mental illness has altered significantly through five editions. A few alterations are praiseworthy, such as the removal of homosexuality as a mental disease. Most of them are dangerous invitations for abuse. For example, the second edition added “hostility” and non-violent “aggression” as symptoms of a mental disorder. The latest edition defines Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD). To be diagnosed with ODD, a person must display four manifestations from the following three behaviors for more than 6 months: an angry mood, argumentative behavior, or vindictiveness. The definition is so sweeping and vague that anyone who has a sustained reason to argue with authority could be diagnosed with ODD.

It has become common for courts to order a mental evaluation of those in custody or in family court, whether or not the ‘crime’ is violent. A prominent example is the whistleblower Bradley or Chelsea Manning. In many cases, they provide a legal justification for stripping people of legal rights and credibility. In other cases, authorities simply wish to punish a dissenter and discourage others from acting similarly. An October 9, 2010 headline in Raw Story read, “Cop hauled off to psych ward after alleging fake crime stats.”

NYPD officer Adrian Schoolcraft accused his supervisors of faking crime statistics and ticket quotas to make them look better. He backed up the accusations with documents and hundreds of hours of recorded tape which he supplied to the Associated Press. As a result of his alleged “hostile” behavior, he was taken in handcuffs to a hospital for evaluation.

Red flag laws in the US will be the equivalent of China’s social credit scoring system. It will be a social credit scoring system to determine if you are politically correct enough to own a firearm. And if you don’t tow the political ideology line that is acceptable by the state, then you are mentally ill.

If you disagree with “Gender Dysphoria” you are deranged. Therefore you must surrender your weapons.
You can’t make this stuff up.
There is an article on ZH right now about 6th graders being suspended for disagreeing with someone who claimed a boy with Gender Dysphoria is a girl.
So now who is going to decide who can own guns?

What would you say about a case study such as this legal U.S. citizen?
Has owned a locally registered pistol for 20+ years. Never fired, except at ranges practicing.
Has owned a pump shotgun for 15 years for infrequent bird, rabbit hunting. Only been fired in the field.
Has held a CPL for 7-8 years, with no incidents of ever brandishing or firing in public situations.
Has possession / access to an SKS, that has only been shot once, on an outdoor range in 5 years.
Has a bolt action WWII era infantry rifle that’s only ever been fired at an outdoor range.
Has a semi-auto .22 caliber rifle that’s only ever been fired at an outdoor range.
Primary reasons for owing guns: Pistol for self defense in home and out in public.
Shotgun for home self defense. Also: for hunting, skeet shooting practice and skills competition.
All other firearms: for variety and fun with shooting skills and target practice.
Proficient in firearms safety, operation, and maintenance. Hunter safety course graduate.
Owns a home free and clear, has been working and paying taxes for close to 50 years.
Never been arrested. A++ credit rating with a spotless credit payment history.
Only citations have been for speeding; mostly when young; just twice in the last 10 years.
And now, drumroll…
15 years ago was going through a bout of severe depression, and sought treatment for it.
Emerged from it successfully after a year of discussion therapy with a psychiatrist, and after 6-8 months on an anti-depressant. It helped cure the depression. (Medical record almost certainly reflects that.)
In general, despises any unnecessary meds. Non-drug user. Moderate alcohol drinker.
Had a mild relapse about 2 years later, went back briefly on the same anti-depressant.
Stopped in 1 month, during 2nd usage. Hasn’t been on it since.
For the last 10-12 years, has been off anti-depressant and is leading a productive life as a tax paying,
law abiding citizen. Holds down a regular 40 hr/week job. Does not play video games.
No anger issues; save for the universal frustrations of living in America.
Is well liked by a wide circle of friends and family. Could round up at least 60-75+ people as personal references that this person is of sound mind and body, and is not a threat to anyone. Has no kids, but is recognized as having a trustworthy, loving, wonderful personality when in their company.
Been faithful to life companion for 26 years with never an incident of domestic violence.
Athletic and practicing reasonably healthy eating habits. No major illnesses. Not a military veteran.
Political leanings: Freedom loving traditionalist; concerned about socialist / progressive trends.

Make the call on this case study. Should this person be allowed to keep their guns and ammunition?
State why, whether yay or nay.
Based on potential red flag legislation and the government’s definition of mental health history and
potential risk to society?

We know what the Democrats and anti-gun crowd would say.
But what would you say?