“Supporting the 2nd Amendment is a Mental Disorder Say Connected Physicians”
And if you disagree vehemently, you’ll soon find that supporting the 1st Amendment in defense of mental disorders is itself a mental disorder. QED.
Dr. Stephen Hargarten of the Research Center at the Medical College of Wisconsin claims : “What I’m struggling with is: Is this the new social norm? This is what we’re going to have to live with if we have more personal access to firearms. We have a public health issue to discuss. Do we wait for the next outbreak or is there something we can do to prevent it.”
Hargarten supports the limiting of access to all firearms in his advocacy with the Firearms Injury Center at the Medical College in Wisconsin which is funded by a US government grant to lobby taxpayers into believing that removing the 2nd Amendment will stop gun violence.
An estimated 260 to 300 million firearms are owned by American civilians which equals 1/3 of US households. While gun-related deaths are not raising according to police records, the fear-mongering continues as a supposed trend with no justification.
More mainstream support for mixing gun control with pharmaceuticals come from Paul Barrett who has authored a book that coincidentally claims that current gun laws are ineffective and need to be stricter to prevent more deaths. Barrett says: “Criminologists have studied it, and the consensus is that those laws simply did not have a statistically meaningful effect on crime rates.” He also feels that the mainstream media focus on the shootings themselves ignore the actual problem which is actually a “social problem” which is subverted by “the overall gun homicide rate.”
Daniel Webster, co-director of the anti-firearm John Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, asserts that “gun ownership—a precursor to gun violence—can spread ‘much like an infectious disease” and wants healthcare professionals to have influence over whether or not American citizens are legally allowed to possess firearms. Webster would like to see Obamacare have ultimate control of the classification of mental states with regard to purchasing and obtaining FBI clearance for a gun.
As Obama has done in the past, an executive order could be signed to force the issue through compliance with Obamacare restrictions on those deemed mentally defective and unable to own firearms. As with the mandate through EO on religious institutions to provide birth control, Obama’s executive power can again be abused to ensure his bidding is done – like any good Fascist Dictator would do.
The blurring of the line between Liberal Democrats and covert Socialists is confusing the perception of the 2nd Amendment in the social meme being purveyed by the mainstream media. By aligning Constitutional authority with the convoluted power grabs of the Obama administration, our Republic for the people and by the people is quickly descending into a control grid of which there is no escape.
Ordinarily, I might conclude this to be a bit of pro-gun fear mongering. But given the number of “studies” we’ve seen over the past dozen or so years — roundly criticized by serious scientists though they’ve been — that have made the argument for either 1) conservative 2) religious belief 3) a desire to shrink government 3) an anti-illegal immigration stance 4) climate “denialism” 5) proponent of traditional marriage as either mental disorders or “hate,” I’m not so quick to dismiss these kinds of dot-connectings.
The Left has used the academy to give leftist assumptions the cover of intellectual rigor — that is, they’ve succeeded in politicizing epistemology itself to aid in their ideological political aims.
It has used “science” to push the idea that scientific “consensus” is the same as established fact — demonizing those who pressure that consensus in a way that turns the very idea of scientific inquiry on its head.
So it is hardly a stretch to believe that using “academic” “scientists” in the field of medicine to push a political agenda whose long term effect would be to greatly increase the power and control of the government over its increasingly de-individualized subjects.
Meaning, while this may well be a bit of pro-gun fear mongering, it is certainly not presented without cause.