Saturday, 17 February 2018

The 21 Discussion

A senator today hyped up the idea of gun purchases having an age limit across the entire US of 21 years old.  I sat and pondered upon this idea.

First, sure....this would be a mighty fine law.  So once you have some Baltimore gang member.....18....with a pistol....are you willing to send the kid off to three years of prison?  If you did make this a law....what's the jail-time?  Six months?  A year?  Three years?

Second, if Junior to go hunting this weekend (Junior is 16)....there's no problem with him borrowing dad's hunting gun....right?

Third, if you had five or six attacks where 19-year old Junior used a professional bow-set....would limit those purchases as well?

Personally, this sounds so swell....that I'd go and add beer or booze sales until 21, no military participation until 21 (unless your parents sign off) credit cards or home loans until 21.....a maximum limit on college loans of $10,000 a year until you turn 21...and no voting until you are 21. I doubt if this Democratic Senator would go along with this idea of mine though. 

If you added up all the mass killings in the past forty many would have this simple law prevented?  Five?  Maybe ten?  Would not have prevented the Vegas shooting.

If I were Trump....I'd go and wretchet up this idea and suggest everything goes to age credit cards, no booze, no cigarettes, no guns, and no voting.  Very quickly.....this idea will disappear. 

The Medicated Society

Last night I spent a fair amount of time reading over statistics.

Roughly twenty-six million Americans (around 9-percent of the population) use illegal drugs (meth, crack, weed, etc).

Roughly one out of every six Americans use some legal mood-changing drugs or antidepressants.  The doctors say it's passed all the tests, and you can have them. 

If you figure up the two groups, you can assume that in a normal day of bumping into one-hundred least thirty of them have medication in their system, or they've doped up in the past couple of days. 

It's a high number, if you think about it.

The real problem that you tend to only think of this group as adults.  So if you were to look around the local school with 500 kids between the ages of ten and eighteen....would it bother you if sixty of them are on some type of antidepressant or mood-changing drug?  If you were a teacher and came to realize in this group of twenty-two students in your room....there two kids contemplating suicide because of the antidepressants, and at least one kid who wanted to terminate some 'mortal-enemy' in the class for stealing their pencil.....would it bother you?

If you were the school bus driver, and had forty-two kids to pick up or deliver home, and eight of those kids were potentially on the borderline of harming themselves or other kids....would it bother you?

It is a heavily medicated society...something that you didn't really have to face in the 1930s or the 1960s. 

So this brings me to this observation.....where exactly will this lead onto? 

Topic of Mass Killings

I sat and spent a fair amount of time on a piece of a 2015 study by Michael F. Stone, a PhD psychoanalyst from New York.  He sat down and spent a fair amount of time looking at mass killings.

For his study, he ended picking 235 mass events (only from the US), from the period of 1913 to 2015.  My guess is that he picked events which had a fair amount of written material, but it's unclear how the 235 were really picked.

One might also note that he didn't go out and interview witnesses but just relied upon the newspapers and books written.

The FBI will tell you that roughly one-thousand mass murders occurred between 1900 and 1999.  Since they didn't come along until the 1930s.....I might go and question how they arrived at their number but I'm willing to accept some basis to start this discussion from.

In most of these 235 events....Stone comes to a clearly defined least 228 of these were folks who had some type of mental illness, psychosis, schizophrenia, or bipolar.

Basically....well over 95-percent fit into his profile of people who weren't capable of grasping the event or what they were doing.

The Vegas shooter?  Well....if you go by what the girlfriend said....he was showing signs of schizophrenia.  The doctor giving him mood-altering drugs?  Nothing in terms of a pubic statement but the fact that the prescription started about a hundred days prior to the event....would lead you to some view of the serious nature of his mental condition.

This kid in Florida?  Based on various descriptions, I'd take a guess he was on medication and probably bi-polar.

The problem here?  Let's say you opened up the books and admitted out of the past twenty years....98-percent of all mass murders were triggered by mental illness.  What exactly are you willing to do?  Would you be willing to confirm six-hundred people per week from across the US to a permanent and ever-lasting mental institute?  I doubt it. 

If they wanted to kill a mass group and didn't get a gun?'d go and explore various other ways from toxic gas, to poison. 

The 9-11 crew?  I think if you really dug into their mental side....most would be defined as having some form of mental illness. 

We've got a problem but it's clearly not going to be solved by discussing gun-control.  The study by Stone?  I'd highly recommend it but it's pretty long. 

The Russian Meddling Story

As the smoke clears over the 13 Russians indicted for campaign 'meddling' have to ask yourself....what exactly happened?

In 2014, some Russian authorities (no one says Putin) decided to send a couple of Russians into the US, on a gather information (intelligence).  They weren't interested in US missile silos, rockets, or even troop strength.  No....their interest was public usage of social media, and how social media was used.

It's probably the weirdest collection mission ever attempted by the Russians.  A couple of guys driving around....asking stupid questions over social social media really works....and how to create fake news. 

Over a period (probably two years), they devised this plan to 'meddle' in the US election.  They would use social media.  They would plant reports and stories. 

No one....not Mueller, or Congress, or any media system....can cite what real affect this led to.  Maybe it influenced 10,000 voters.....maybe 100,000 voters....maybe one-million voters.  But you can't cite this as a fact.

In various ways, they planted stories or news that made Bernie Sanders look better than Hillary.  They planted stories that made Trump look good.  They might even planted stories that made McCain look brilliant, or Jeb Bush look like an idiot.  They had public events where they sponsored groups.

Prior to the November election, they used one tactic of suggesting to blacks not to bother voting.  To be honest, you can't cite the true effect of this.  Maybe 10,000 blacks did take the advice and just stayed home.  Maybe 100,000.  Maybe even one-million.  And if they did stay home....were they honest-Hillary-voters or honest-Trump-voters?  Again, there are no facts.

Then after the election, they funneled money to leftist groups to show up for anti-Trump rallies.  No, these were not the Hillary-supported, or Soros-supported, or DNC-supported anti-Trump rallies....these were the Russian-supported anti-Trump efforts.  The fact that one anti-Trump rally would occur in X-city and be Russian-supported, but two states away was another anti-Trump rally but supported by Soros?  Well....let's not bring that up.

Where this goes now?  You bring the 13 Russians into a court and try to have some jury case worked up.  The problem I see is that the Russians might show up with the KGB experts and documented evidence from November 2011, and January/February 2012 Russian elections.....where US social media (you know, Goggle, Facebook, and Twitter) showed up and influenced the anti-Putin group and harmed the Putin campaign.   If you were on the jury, you would sit there and eventually ask the judge....if the American 'idiots' from the Obama Administration started this whole thing in 2011....shouldn't those Americans be dragged into a Russian court and be charged with election meddling as well?  Were the Russians only returning the favor? 

Oh.  Yeah. 

But here's the bigger question, with all the Russian work it possible that they really only affected 10,000 votes across the entire US?  This is the bigger mystery to the whole story.