Where are the thought police when you need them.
Oh. There they are. I can see them.
The lamestream media told you:
The Arizona Republic, Gannett's #2 rag after USA Today, said, in an editorial, "The mentally ill should not have guns."
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
Can you see where this is going? Crazy people shouldn't have guns, sure. "Mentally ill" people, that's a judgment call, not a diagnostic test. How mentally ill is ill enough to start placing people in forbidden zones? Depressed? Angry? Angry a lot? Cursing regularly?
Once you're in the NICS Index -- the federal list of people whose right to keep and bear arms is extinguished -- you're in the forbidden zone with no practical way out. The anti-gun-rights forces want to see that list grow by leaps and bounds. They understand -- it's one effective strategy for taking away all the guns.
"Boy, that guy seems crazy to me," said one neighbor to another, before calling police and, unknowingly, ruining that man's life forever. Being sufficiently crazy (or at least charged as such) to make the gun-ban list, removes your right to a lot of things.
Everyone is going to have to walk around deliberately acting "normal," being careful not to step outside "acceptable" bounds or else people around may start to think you might be "mentally ill." This massive cultural paranoia can set in, as we all watch each other, scrutinize the person next to you, wonder if he's thinking thoughts he shouldn't. Why, just owning a bunch of guns and a modest stockpile of ammo implies you might be crazy. Who would want to do such a thing? There's something about Harry...
AND in other news:
All the problems with classical Freudian psychiatry are apparently starting to resurface with a trend amongst "normal" cognative therapists. Ted K. a prominent figure in the education reform movement, is expressing concern over a new effort to stigmatize, or at least label children who aren't as bright as others. With guidelines that are not clearly established, at least some "professionals" want such kids identified as Sluggish Cognitive Tempo children. Whether this is a disabling condition for other legal purposes, and what remedies or redress might exist for having been given the label, was not clear at press time.
The New York Times told you:
"With more than six million American children having received a diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, concern has been rising that the condition is being significantly misdiagnosed and overtreated with prescription medications." [The Uninvited Ombudsman notes that this is indicative of pretend science.]
"Yet now some powerful figures in mental health are claiming to have identified a new disorder that could vastly expand the ranks of young people treated for attention problems. Calledsluggish cognitive tempo, the condition is said to be characterized by lethargy, daydreaming and slow mental processing. By some researchers' estimates, it is present in perhaps two million children." [The Uninvited Ombudsman notes this is indicative of pretend science on steroids -- they are just making this stuff up as they go along.]
"Experts pushing for more research [read: funding to pay themselves with] into sluggish cognitive tempo say it is gaining momentum [read: pure hype to get the funding] toward recognition as a legitimate disorder [that is, recognition by the people doing the recognition, to get the funding] -- and, as such, a candidate for pharmacological treatment [that's where the money is]. Some of the condition's researchers have helped Eli Lilly investigate how its flagship A.D.H.D. drug might treat it." [no attempt to hide self-evident bias and conflict of interest.]