U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Whiteness is a condition one first acquires and then one has—a malignant, parasitic-like condition to which ‘white” people have a particular susceptibility,” the abstract for “On Having Whiteness” in The Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association asserts. “Parasitic Whiteness renders its hosts’ appetites voracious, insatiable, and perverse. These deformed appetites particularly target nonwhite peoples.
“There is not yet a permanent cure,” we are told.
Possibly there is if one is to heed the prescription offered by Dr. Aruna Khilanani, a Manhattan psychiatrist and psychoanalyst who offered her “final solution” to medical students and faculty at Yale School of Medicine’s Child Study Center. While lecturing on the “Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind,” she “told the audience that she had fantasized about ‘unloading a revolver into the head of any white person’ who got in her way,” the Daily Mail reported.
These aren’t just isolated nutjobs. These are voices that influence their professions. Their opinions, in turn, are used to shape public opinion and craft laws, including citizen disarmament edicts enacted under the pretext of “mental health.”
There’s a reason why they call us “gun nuts.”
That’s why “helpful” Republicans who enjoy a reputation of being “pro-gun” are not doing the people who elected them any favors by advancing “bipartisan” legislation.
Backers of such bills tell us “due process” protections will be ensured by seeing individuals get their day in court. It would help if we knew what protections equivalent to those provided in a jury trial that will provide. Specifically, will decisions rely on those who may have biases of their own, as can currently be the case, with ATF’s “clarifying the term ‘adjudicated as a mental defective’ to mean a determination by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority,” and with some states applying even broader “standards”?
What objective protections will exist to offset politically connected anti-gun judges, politically-appointed boards, and “expert” adherents of the American Psychiatric Association’s “Position Statement on Firearm Access, Acts of Violence and the Relationship to Mental Illness and Mental Health Services.” It’s fair to ask because APA included in its advocacy platform such diktats as registration-enabling background checks, “smart” guns, storage mandates, “gun-free” zones, doctor-patient boundary violations, and tax-funded anti-gun “studies,” all outside the scope of the training and credentialing of those making these proposals.
Of special interest – or it should be: How will rights be restored when there is no longer a compelling mental health prescription to deny them (assuming that’s even obtainable)?
What universal appeal mechanism – affordable to all, not just to elites for whom money is no object – will exist to declare a person is once more “eligible” to keep and bear arms? What guarantees are there that the same biases that colored the disability ruling in the first place won’t reassert themselves in the “parole” process? And have we identified psychiatric evaluators, risk management administrators, and insurers who will be willing to subject themselves to malpractice liabilities should a person deemed “fit” be misdiagnosed? Or will the pressure from all considerations be to “err on the side of caution”?
The simple truth of the matter is that anyone who can’t be trusted with a gun can’t be trusted without a custodian, and that must require full due process before being imposed. Leaving someone who has been adjudicated a danger to himself or others with uncontrolled access to people and things will only produce disaster. As the quote (popularly but incorrectly attributed to Einstein) goes, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.
Racist shrinks who view human beings they hate as malignant parasites who deserve to be shot in the head are more than crazy, they’re evil. Trusting anti-gun associations that promote such monstrous ideas with a say in anyone’s rights is beyond nuts, it’s suicidal.
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
The post Obsessed Shrinks Show Insanity of Trusting Haters with a Say on Gun Disabilities appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/3x9rAyT
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment