Disarming the middle class:

[Wyldk2]

http://bearingarms.com/disarming-the-middle-class

 

 

Yet another idiot gun controlling democrat at the helm.

[TMF]

I love how liberal Democrats justify a tax increase because there hasn't been one in years.  That is what his argument is here.  As if there exists the expectation that taxes should increase in percentage as time goes on.  People like this need to kick their oxygen habit for the good of the rest of us.

[Guest nra37922]

Vacation out of state to buy ammo.  One can always buy firearms off the book if needed.

[NoBanStan]

Politicians are motivated by two things, Money and agenda. This tax hike won't be pouring directly into their bank accounts, so that leaves the latter. This is only being proposed because they're butthurt that the rest of their unconstitutional bills have been shot down.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Has lunacy evolved as the common demonInator among politicians in the 21st century?

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Has lunacy evolved as the common demonInator among politicians in the 21st century?

Yes. In additon, POLITICIAN == SOCIOPATH. Crazy Sociopaths.

[TMF]

Yes. In additon, POLITICIAN == SOCIOPATH.

Funny you mention that. I recently recall reading or seeing a story on TV regarding politicians and sociopathic tendencies, as explained by a psychologist.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Funny you mention that. I recently recall reading or seeing a story on TV regarding politicians and sociopathic tendencies, as explained by a psychologist.

Got a moldy old piece of paper up in the attic somewhere, attesting that I am a psychologist. That and a dollar will buy a cup of coffee. :)

[TMF]

Got a moldy old piece of paper up in the attic somewhere, attesting that I am a psychologist. That and a dollar will buy a cup of coffee. :)

Ha, does that mean you see the relevance of such an opinion or look at it through the eyes of a skeptic?

[BigK]

Why don't these idiots stay home and poop in their own backyard instead of going to Washington and trying to ruin things for the rest of us?

[RobertNashville]

http://bearingarms.com/disarming-the-middle-class

 

 

Yet another idiot gun controlling democrat at the helm.

It's not really polite to repeat yourself you know.  ;)

[Ray Z]

I've read about the excise tax that hasn't changed change since 1935. How about the tax the ATF puts on guns? How about the one the state department puts on all guns and things associated with guns? Like ammo, powder, primers, bullets, and a bunch of other stuff. I talked to the people from Brownell's. They have to have a license for a bunch of difference stuff. Each one cost bucks. Guess who ends up paying the bill? Back door gun control??? NAAAAH!!  

[mikegideon]

Got a moldy old piece of paper up in the attic somewhere, attesting that I am a psychologist. That and a dollar will buy a cup of coffee. :)

 

I've known several folks with that degree. Not a waste of time, but real hard to turn it into a living wage.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Ha, does that mean you see the relevance of such an opinion or look at it through the eyes of a skeptic?

 

I don't get out much. Have met a few politicians but not a huge number. Mostly when they were drunk at bars or parties where I was playing piano. Of the politicians I've met, there are a few politicians that did not show obvious sociopathy (from my impression). Hadn't thought about it til right now, but the non-sociopaths were generally benign manager-types with good people skills and no obvious bad habits.

 

One was a genuinely great fella, though an "old style democrat" and if we discussed policy deeply there were disagreements, but he could defend his opinons with skill and logic. Held up his side of the debate. A skilled "people person". But he was an old time non-politically-correct good ole boy democrat and I haven't spoken to him lately of his opinion of the current situation. He had an "old time" PhD in education and started out teaching and being a HS principal. He wasn't trying to change the world or fundamentally change anything, just get thangs to work as smooth as possible.

 

Another is a democrat and as best I can tell a real stand-up family man, as good a guy as you could meet. Quiet to the point of shyness, hard worker, paid his way thru his MBA working on the night shift. Very responsible and serious and made a bunch of money. He did the mayor gig for awhile and I wasn't impressed with his policy decisions. IMO some bad ideas, but not an ideologue, just a great manager "trying to make things work" and smart as a whip, though IMO some policies were non-productive. Even great fellas can be wrong. Not a sociopath.

 

Another democrat was a lawyer getting rich on high-stakes real estate. Great guy, wonderful wife, was active in John Glenn's presidential bid some decades ago and as best I can tell did a fabulous job managing NTSB under Clinton. Not a sociopath.

 

However, maybe this is my predjudice showing, but the above fellas "rubbed shoulders" with some real slimy sociopaths. Am purt certain these guys were not sociopaths, but they sure did work closely with a few that I'd never welcome to my house.

 

The others I've met, they seemed rather sociopathic and unlikeable. The more prominent, the more sociopathic and slimy. But maybe I've got it all wrong. Dunno. They sure look sociopathic on CSPAN.

 

I've known several folks with that degree. Not a waste of time, but real hard to turn it into a living wage.

 

It is real interesting and I suppose its good for something or t'other. Just got bored with it. I can do a real good act at being a people person when necessary, but it is too much work for the money and after the "new" wore off, decided that gadgets are more interesting than typical people. :) Ain't a complete misanthrope. Got nothing against people in small enough doses but it gets old fast.

 

Looking back, hooking up rat brains to oscilloscopes was maybe more interesting than the other topics. But was real curious about the general field at one time.

 

Wife and bro-in-law are industrial psychologists and have made a decent enough living. One designing and implementing training programs, another a specialist in corporate personnel software. She may as well have the title of database architect or whatever.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Lester Weevils

[bersaguy]

My idea of gun control is to have both hands firmly on your weapon before firing it...................... :usa: :up:
 

[NoBanStan]

Funny you mention that. I recently recall reading or seeing a story on TV regarding politicians and sociopathic tendencies, as explained by a psychologist.

It makes total sense. If you were to put an average sensible family man/woman in office they would be crushed by all the under table politics and back stabbing because they would probably call out corruption.

[TMF]

[quote name="NoBanStan" post="1020251" timestamp="1377281742"] It makes total sense. If you were to put an average sensible family man/woman in office they would be crushed by all the under table politics and back stabbing because they would probably call out corruption.[/quote] http://youtu.be/PDVvYzEdp_s I found what I was talking about. I saw it on Big Think. Edited August 23, 2013 by TMF

[TMF]

I don't get out much. Have met a few politicians but not a huge number. Mostly when they were drunk at bars or parties where I was playing piano. Of the politicians I've met, there are a few politicians that did not show obvious sociopathy (from my impression). Hadn't thought about it til right now, but the non-sociopaths were generally benign manager-types with good people skills and no obvious bad habits.

One was a genuinely great fella, though an "old style democrat" and if we discussed policy deeply there were disagreements, but he could defend his opinons with skill and logic. Held up his side of the debate. A skilled "people person". But he was an old time non-politically-correct good ole boy democrat and I haven't spoken to him lately of his opinion of the current situation. He had an "old time" PhD in education and started out teaching and being a HS principal. He wasn't trying to change the world or fundamentally change anything, just get thangs to work as smooth as possible.

Another is a democrat and as best I can tell a real stand-up family man, as good a guy as you could meet. Quiet to the point of shyness, hard worker, paid his way thru his MBA working on the night shift. Very responsible and serious and made a bunch of money. He did the mayor gig for awhile and I wasn't impressed with his policy decisions. IMO some bad ideas, but not an ideologue, just a great manager "trying to make things work" and smart as a whip, though IMO some policies were non-productive. Even great fellas can be wrong. Not a sociopath.

Another democrat was a lawyer getting rich on high-stakes real estate. Great guy, wonderful wife, was active in John Glenn's presidential bid some decades ago and as best I can tell did a fabulous job managing NTSB under Clinton. Not a sociopath.

However, maybe this is my predjudice showing, but the above fellas "rubbed shoulders" with some real slimy sociopaths. Am purt certain these guys were not sociopaths, but they sure did work closely with a few that I'd never welcome to my house.

The others I've met, they seemed rather sociopathic and unlikeable. The more prominent, the more sociopathic and slimy. But maybe I've got it all wrong. Dunno. They sure look sociopathic on CSPAN.


It is real interesting and I suppose its good for something or t'other. Just got bored with it. I can do a real good act at being a people person when necessary, but it is too much work for the money and after the "new" wore off, decided that gadgets are more interesting than typical people. :) Ain't a complete misanthrope. Got nothing against people in small enough doses but it gets old fast.

Looking back, hooking up rat brains to oscilloscopes was maybe more interesting than the other topics. But was real curious about the general field at one time.

Wife and bro-in-law are industrial psychologists and have made a decent enough living. One designing and implementing training programs, another a specialist in corporate personnel software. She may as well have the title of database architect or whatever.

As always, great to hear your opinion and experience. Above is the video I was referencing before.

[JAB]

So, how long has it been since there was an increase in the tax on being a jackass politician?  I am thinking that is where we need to set our priorities.

 

More and more I understand the ammo hoarders.  Not the folks buying to resell but those who have multiple pallet loads of ammo.  I have a small - very small - 'stash', I guess, but I am not a hoarder.  If I had the cash to invest, however, I just might be.  Not even so much because of an expected TEOTWAWKI event or some, other SHTF scenario but just so I would know that I would always have ammo to shoot my guns if some Arschloch of a politician ever manages to pass one of these back-door gun control 'limit the ammo they can buy/afford' bills.

Edited August 23, 2013 by JAB

[Wyldk2]

I don't think all democrats are idiots, nor are all of them gun controlling idiots.

 

Just most of these gun control bills introduced are from the democrats. Those that think gun control will solve the problem need to re-think things. It is more a People control instead of gun control.

 

Just I haven't heard many republicans backing or promoting any of these gun control bills.

 

Patriot act, and others under Bush Jr., maybe. But not under the republican senators or reps. At least as of lately.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Just I haven't heard many republicans backing or promoting any of these gun control bills.

 

Patriot act, and others under Bush Jr., maybe. But not under the republican senators or reps. At least as of lately.

 

Seems to me that both parties are anti-freedom, but they target different freedoms. Dunno whether both parties are equally anti-freedom, but neither party approves of too much freedom. Centrist despots who believe that "a little bit of tyrrany" is just about right. For our own good. Just looking out for the folks, just like Bill O'Reilly. :)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Brady

James Scott "Jim" Brady (born August 29, 1940) is a former Assistant to the President and White House Press Secretary under U.S. President Ronald Reagan. After nearly being killed and becoming permanently disabled as a result of an assassination attempt on Reagan in 1981, Brady became an ardent supporter of gun control.

 

There are numerous R congresscritters who would vote for gun control if the wind was blowing the right way. Especially the likes of McCain, Graham, or that idiot Peter King whose wet-dream is to ban guns for anyone who happens to be on secret terror watch lists. Those lists where you can't find out if you are on the list, or why, or how to get yerself off the list. Consider NJ Gov Cristy. He would sign any kind of gun control if the wind was blowing the right way. As would our own lovable Alexander and Corker. If the passage of a gun control bill hinged on the single vote of Alexander or Corker, is there any way imagining them NOT voting for the bill? To enhance their own influence and avoid their pals' ire? Win friends and influence people.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

As always, great to hear your opinion and experience. Above is the video I was referencing before.

 

Thanks TMF, interesting videos (also followed the links to other parts of the fella's talk).

 

Was reading a bit today, and the terminology seems to have changed a little since I paid attention to it back in the day. They keep revising the diagnoses and definitions. Or maybe I didn't fully understand it "back then" or my recollection is faulty after so many years.

 

I recalled "sociopath" as being basically "psychopath lite". Psychopaths often find themselves in prison, because they just can't keep from stepping on their own peckers. They tend to have poor impulse control and violent tendencies.

 

Whereas my conception of a sociopathic politician, union boss, captain of industry, or rock star-- Such person would share the charm, lack of empathy, manipulative talent, willingness to use people, lack of shame-- While being bright with fairly good impulse control and skilled enough at the game to possibly die of old age wealthy without ever seeing the inside of a jail. Imagine Ted Bundy with all of his brilliance, shallow charms and manipulative abilities-- But with impulse control. Maybe he would get his kicks bankrupting competitors rather than murdering women.

 

Am pretty certain I heard such ideas from perfessors in the past.

 

However, the current definitions are different from the above. Sociopathology now seems a "general category" rather than a diagnosis, and the descriptions for both Psychopathic disorder and Antisocial personality disorder-- Well they are pretty much the same as in the past, but if you add up all the other charming features that make up a psychopath, but remove the violence and poor impulse control, I just don't know if there would be enough left to call the fella exactly a psychopath in modern terminology.

 

If you were interested in wading thru the crap, some of the wikipedia pages look pretty good--

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_or_sociopathy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_Checklist

Factor 1: Interpersonal/Affective"

• Glibness/superficial charm
• Grandiose sense of self-worth
• Pathological lying
• Cunning/manipulative
• Lack of remorse or guilt
• Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric)
• Callousness; lack of empathy
• Failure to accept responsibility for his or her own actions

Factor 2: Lifestyle/Antisocial."

• Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
• Parasitic lifestyle
• Poor behavioral control
• Lack of realistic long-term goals
• Impulsiveness
• Irresponsibility
• Juvenile delinquency
• Early behavior problems
• Revocation of conditional release
• Criminal versatility

 

Some biased ideas on this stuff--

 

If you see a theory which references terms such as Freud, Ego, Super-ego, or Id, then it is ancient useless pseudoscientific bullcrap and can be safely ignored. :)

 

Many categorizations of "disorders" are collections of symptoms. But merely being able to name something doesn't yield understanding. Merely because you find people displaying a collection of properties doesn't necessarily have any import. Some of the classifications seem about as scientific as astrology.

 

It is interesting when they can examine subjects in one of the classic arbitrary diagnoses, using modern brain scan and other techniques and actually find statistically significant differences in how the brain works. Which might be evidence that some of the names and arbitrary collections of characteristics might actually have real-world relevance.

 

There is a math technique-- Factor Analysis. You arrange lots of measurements from lots of individuals in a huge multidimensional grid and let the computer loose on it, correlating everything against everything else, and you sometimes get vectors which tie together various measurements that you might not have noticed looking at a big pile of numbers. This technique is not viewed as very useful in most scientific specialties but has been used in psychology quite a bit, especially in personality psychology.

 

Such math diddling is the foundation for some personality tests and rationale that one might be naming something "real" rather than just an arbitrary group of symptoms that some crazy psychiatrist dreamed up.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Lester Weevils

[JAB]

I don't think all democrats are idiots, nor are all of them gun controlling idiots.

 

Just most of these gun control bills introduced are from the democrats. Those that think gun control will solve the problem need to re-think things. It is more a People control instead of gun control.

 

Just I haven't heard many republicans backing or promoting any of these gun control bills.

 

Patriot act, and others under Bush Jr., maybe. But not under the republican senators or reps. At least as of lately.

 

Well, Romney backed and signed into law a pretty sweeping gun control bill as governor of Massachusetts. 

 

The Lord High God of Republicanism, Ronald Reagan, supported and signed gun control laws as governor of California (which, in turn, likely started a lot of the Kommiefornia gun control crap that has since spread like a cancer to the rest of the nation.)

 

Later in life, Reagan also supported the Brady BIll:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/29/opinion/why-i-m-for-the-brady-bill.html

 

Certainly the most vocal, rabid anti-gunners currently in positions of power are generally Democrats but I wonder if that doesn't have more to do with the fact that areas of the country where anti-gun sentiments run highest tend to elect not only Democrats but extremely left-leaning Democrats.  I also think that many politicians on both sides of the aisle have learned a lesson about what can happen to their chances of re-election if they support gun control.

 

My point is that I don't think we can assume that either party is 'on our side' beyond using the issue to try and drum up support for their next re-election bid.

Edited August 26, 2013 by JAB

[Guest ThePunisher]

Well, Romney backed and signed into law a pretty sweeping gun control bill as governor of Massachusetts.

The Lord High God of Republicanism, Ronald Reagan, supported and signed gun control laws as governor of California (which, in turn, likely started a lot of the Kommiefornia gun control crap that has since spread like a cancer to the rest of the nation.)

Later in life, Reagan also supported the Brady BIll:

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/29/opinion/why-i-m-for-the-brady-bill.html

Certainly the most vocal, rabid anti-gunners currently in positions of power are generally Democrats but I wonder if that doesn't have more to do with the fact that areas of the country where anti-gun sentiments run highest tend to elect not only Democrats but extremely left-leaning Democrats. I also think that many politicians on both sides of the aisle have learned a lesson about what can happen to their chances of re-election if they support gun control.

My point is that I don't think we can assume that either party is 'on our side' beyond using the issue to try and drum up support for their next re-election bid.

The Brady Bill didn't become law until 1993, and the assault weapons ban was signed into law in 1994 both during the Bill Clinton presidency, and helped along with Democrat tax hikes for the Republicans to gain control of Congress for first time in over 40 years. Fast forward to December 2012 just right after Obama gets re-elected to second term, and the Democratic controlled senate along with Obama's blessings bring forth legislation to ban almost every type pistol and rifle. Thank goodness for Republican controlled House of Representatives or we would have lost most of our gun rights and privileges.

I don't think we would have faced this gun confiscation threat if Romney had beaten the commie-in-chief in the WH. The Dumacrats and Obama are bold and determined to end gun ownership in the USA. I don't believe gun owners would be as fearful of losing 2nd Amendment rights if Romney was the POTUS right now. But people can believe what ever they want to believe when it comes to what would be the most gun friendly political party. Edited August 26, 2013 by ThePunisher

[Wyldk2]

If you would read my post, I said "as of lately". Not many republicans have called for more gun control lately. Though there are idiots everywhere it seems.

 

If they would only enforce the laws they have on the books instead of passing new rediculous laws, maybe we wouldn't have so much idiocracy abound.   But I digress, The way the world is going right now, Idiocracy is becoming more rampant.

 

Heard about the recent MVA's on MTV and you can see just a part of the craziness.

 

Mind you all, I don't think of one side vs the other side in Politics. It seems we are at the mercy of a 2-party system until something drastically changes. Repubs vs demos but behind closed doors they might be buddy-buddy with each other.

 

Don't vote for either, just the best person for the job, even if i have to go Independent( which I have last 2 elections) simply because both candidates of the main parties have been complete idiots.