"Prohibited People"?
Just what did we fight WWII to stop?
Sure, we fought it to stop a Mad Man from taking over all of Europe, but we also fought it to disavow the noxious principle of singling out a group of innocent people and making them, and their families, “prohibited persons”.
How soon we forget the lessons of the Shoah, because it looks like the idea that there can be “prohibited persons” is alive and well enough in the halls of Congress that I may just have to get my own forearm tattoo.
Not content to try to ban virtually all firearms with HR-1022, or opportunistically dance on the graves of the Virginia Tech dead with HR-1859, dictators-in-training McCarthy and Dingell have introduced a McCarthyesque (how appropriate, Joe would be proud) bill to compile and maintain information on every person in America… to determine whether or not they are “prohibited persons”.
Introduced back in January by Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D/S), HR 297 is intended among other things to dangerously broaden the definition of "mental illness".
Section (102)(c)(3) states:
"The State shall make available to the Attorney General ... the name and other relevant identifying information of persons adjudicated as mentally defective or those committed to mental institutions to assist the Attorney General in enforcing section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code."
Can you imagine? ANYONE who has been to a mental institution or "adjudicated as mentally defective" would have their name and identifying information sent to the federal government - to be held in perpetuity and used however any current or future "Justice Department" sees fit.
It doesn't matter if you needed assistance coping with the devastating loss of a loved one or war-related post- traumatic stress disorder. It doesn't matter if you only stayed for a night because a spouse was worried about you, or you had Post Partum depression.
Regardless of circumstances, your information would be still be submitted and you would become a "prohibited person" - prohibited from whatever the US Department of Justice deems inappropriate for the "Mentally Ill".
In theory, if you were found not to have a mental illness, your name could be removed from the list. But in this day and age of such psychiatric diagnoses as "Oppositional Defiance Disorder" and "Caffeine Dependence Syndrome", what's the likelihood of escaping without such a label? Once a family member is designated as a “prohibited person”, the entire family (in community property states) will become, by simple proximity, “prohibited persons” as well. If one person in a household is “prohibited from possessing”, everyone in the household is. Guilt by Association – an American Tradition (since RICO anyway…)
The unintended consequences are obvious to any thinking person. As a result of HR 297, more people who really do need mental help will avoid getting it. Fearing the consequent loss of their rights, individuals will refuse to visit a therapist or mental facility, and will therefore be untreated and MORE likely to become a danger to themselves or others.
In one fell swoop, HR 297 will totally negate the decades of progress that have been made in de-stigmatizing mental therapy, while increasing the likelihood of repeating a Virginia Tech style slaughter.
People with a Diagnosis will forever be labeled as "undesirable" in the US legal system, and with more and more employers using DOJ data when doing background checks, it will be more and more difficult for even a stable, treated person to get a job... and the income/insurance necessary to remain treated.
Ostensibly, this obscene bill is about “gun control”, but as I have stated – you can’t ban what anyone can make. So it looks like they are going to ban people.
My wife is Bi Polar. Time to dig out my grand-uncle’s big yellow star.
(Poster's Disclaimer: some useful/well written text blatantly plagerized from GOA & JPFO alerts...)Labels: CultureOfCorruption, Politics
