Sunday, November 10, 2019

Political Theater: Trump vs. The Left and the unnoticed approach of the police state

Joseph Goebbels once said that a lie repeated often enough would be accepted as truth. Perhaps then, if the truth is continuously repeated, it too will be accepted for what it is. Sometimes, the truth does not sit well in the minds of men. It forces us to face discomfort and accept realities that we otherwise might ignore to satisfy our own sense of reality. Living the lie allows us to disregard our personal responsibilities to the world around us while providing us with a false sense of security that tends to diminish when faced with the realization that we have been deceived. Nothing could demonstrate this idea better than the political circus that is our government.

Since the election of Donald Trump America has been treated to a non-stop, relentless propaganda campaign designed to discredit and unseat the man as a duly elected president. Many of his diehard supporters have come to believe that he is singlehandedly waging a battle for freedom against an entrenched “deep state.” The more the left rallies against him the more his supporters love him. In fact, sixty-two percent of his voters have said that it wouldn’t matter what he did, they would still support him. This is disturbing as it shows an unwillingness to face the truth.

While the attention of the country has been focused on the impeachment drama, a Trump vs. the Democrats soap opera, the nation is in fact, taking a draconian turn to the left and no one notices. It isn’t that they don’t notice ̶ rather, it is a refusal to come to grips with the idea that things may not be what they seem. While one side portrays the president as someone who absolutely must be removed from office because he colluded with the Russians, or engaged in “quid pro quo” with Ukraine, the other side shows him as a man who can do no wrong. A brilliant tactician who is engaging in a game of four-dimensional chess who at any moment will take down the deep state and restore America to greatness. Sometimes, when things seem too good to be true, they are.

Carrol Quigley, a former professor from Georgetown University and author of the book “Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in our Time” is quoted as saying the American political system should give the impression that there are two parties working against one another when in truth, they are pursuing the exact same policies. It should also be noted that Quigley was one of Bill Clinton’s professors.

The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies... is a foolish idea. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies. (Quigley, 1966)

Attorney General Barr recently released a memorandum, to little fanfare no less, to U.S. attorneys across the country detailing his plan to create a pre-crime detection system in the Justice Department. According to Joe Wolverton II of The New American Magazine, this system will enable social media companies to share their collected data on individuals who are displaying a potential for violence with federal agencies in an effort to stop mass shootings before they occur. The key words being used here are “disrupt those who are mobilizing for violence.” In other words, Facebook, Google, Twitter and other social media platforms will be sending what you say to the federal government if they think you are acting in a threatening way. This is kind of like passing a national red-flag law without having to pass it. Donald Trump can safely back away from his support for red-flag laws and still get what he wants as a matter of policy.  The fact that this initiative wasn’t publicly announced should show American’s that the impeachment sideshow is just that, a distraction from the fact that two political parties are working together to suppress our liberties and subvert the constitution.

This slow and steady advancement of the police state is a perfect example illustrating Quigley’s quote. First, it was the Patriot Act under Bush. We had to surrender some of our liberties to keep us safe in the wake of the September 11 terror attacks. Then, under Obama, it was the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011, where the war on terror was gradually being moved to the American home front. Slowly and ever so incrementally, the image of Islamic terrorism is being replaced, and everyday patriotic Americans are being viewed as potential threats.

The theatrical production being presented to America is vote Trump or get socialism. The truth is that we are going to end up with the same no matter which way we vote. The trick is getting us to accept it. People will argue that Trump has done so many wonderful things and the economy is booming ̶ but the truth is that the government doesn’t control the economy, the federal reserve does. The economy is something that can be manipulated to go one way or the other, it has no consequential effects in the long game of transforming America. The Left and the Right can continue to have false debates on non-essential issues, keeping the American people trapped in their ideological boxes while steadily advancing an agenda most of us aren’t paying attention to. The only way we could possibly reverse course is to come to grips with the idea that things may not be what they seem and stop declaring that we would vote for a president no matter what he does. 

Sunday, October 27, 2019

Scientific turmoil:Chaos through the transgender agenda

As the nation continues its leftward drift into a pit of orchestrated disarray, it is becoming clear that that the agenda itself is simply, uncontrollable chaos. There are many things happening in the nation that people have a hard time wrapping their heads around. People are confused, definitions of right and wrong have become deluded and in some areas of the country, expressing any form of patriotism has become a dangerous endeavor. The truth is that people will not understand what is going on until they accept a fundamental premise; a premise that has largely been discredited as a conspiracy theory in the minds of many Americans. Everything going on in the country today is part of a communist agenda to breakdown your morality, leaving you bewildered and not knowing where to stand. This could not be more apparent than the ongoing assault of the traditional family and the remaking of man himself through the “trans” agenda. 

To produce a maximum of chaos in the culture of the enemy is our first most important step.  Our fruits are grown in chaos, distrust, economic depression, and scientific turmoil.  At last a weary populace can seek peace only in our offered Communist State, at last only communism can resolve the problems of the masses.[1]

The nation is going mad with the transgender agenda. Our children are being taught that gender is not determined by biology. Men are competing in women’s sports and stealing their opportunities,[2] and they are now airing television commercials depicting men having menstrual cycles.[3] They claim that transgenderism represents a new era in human rights and a failure, or refusal to accept this is akin to racism. You’re a hateful bigot if you oppose a man who dresses like a woman using the same public bathroom as your five-year-old daughter.

For years the left has accused the conservatives of waging a relentless war on women. Building off the first words of Betty Friedan’s Feminine Mystique,[4] they have insisted that women have been used and abused in an oppressive patriarchy, and that men expect nothing from women except to be barefoot and pregnant, dutifully submitting to his every demand.

The problem lay buried, unspoken for many years in the minds of American women. It was a strange stirring, a sense of dissatisfaction, a yearning that women suffered in the middle of the twentieth century in the United States. Each suburban wife struggled with it alone. As she made the beds, shopped for groceries, matched slip cover material, ate peanut butter sandwiches with her children, chauffeured cub scouts and brownies, lay beside her husband at night-she was afraid to ask of herself the silent question- “Is this all?” (Friedan, The Feminine Mystique)

The truth is that Friedan was a professional propagandist of the Communist party[5] and likely wrote the Feminist Mystique in order to create the division we see between men and women today. One of the goals of the Communist party is to discredit the family[6] as an institution. As mentioned earlier, in the minds of many Americans, the “communist conspiracy” has been discredited however, some truths are self-evident. 

When it comes to the transgender non-sense gripping the country many people are asking where the feminists are. Why are the women’s rights activists who have been so oppressed by men, allowing them to compete in women’s sports and use their bathrooms? The truth is one that is difficult to grasp. You first must accept the premise that there is indeed a communist agenda to turn everything up-side down, destroy your morality and remake society in their image. Friedan, as mentioned in the previous paragraph, was a communist. 

Marx also viewed the family as a vehicle of oppression in the sense that it encouraged the exploitation of women.

Some Marxists viewed the household as an institution that functions to support capitalism and it permits or even encourages exploitation. That is, by creating and recreating sexual inequalities, and keeping women in the home with responsibility for family subsistence, emotional support and reproduction, the family helps capitalism continue to exploit labor and helps maintains stability within a system of class oppression and inequality.[7]

Furthermore, the destruction of the traditional views of gender was also viewed as something that would liberate women from this oppression. Consider the writings of Freya Brown. In an article called “On the Social Construction of Sex,”[8] she makes the “gender and sex are only social constructs” argument and claims that the differences between the sexes are due to societies patriarchal dominance, which must be deconstructed. 

Ultimately, the belief that trans women have access to the benefits of patriarchy is based on a metaphysical view of gender, which takes the presence or lack of certain genitalia as a basis for a “real” gender, existing outside of actually observable social relations and material reality, yet still somehow affecting the contours of gender oppression. This theory is thoroughly anti-materialist and frankly bogus, yet it is allowed to carry more weight than it is due because sex is considered to be innate and immutable. Revealing sex as a socially constructed concept inexorably interwoven with gender would be a major step forward toward combating the ideological justifications for the oppression of trans women. Of course, the sex/gender dichotomy is part of an ideology that is a product of and a justification for patriarchy, a structural relationship which is oppressive to all women. To argue this in detail however will require a historical materialist analysis. (Brown, On the Social Construction of Sex)

The name of Brown’s website speaks for itself., indicating that she is indeed, a Marxist.

The truth is that conservatism and holding a pro-family stance is more pro-woman than anything the left is pushing. We would never advocate allowing a man posing as a woman to invade the privacy of a little girl in the restroom or allow men to wrestle away athletic opportunities from teenage female athletes, and it isn’t because we are hateful bigots. How you can you be pro-woman and support such non-sense? The traditional view of the family is one where men and women enter into a mutually agreeable contract, where both are viewed as equal partners with different attributes which contribute to the betterment of society. The nation was founded on the principle that family life laid the groundwork for a system of self-governance and liberty, which is why it is so viciously attacked. To the founders, the family represented true equality between the sexes and freedom.

The Founders’ vision of family is built on the equality of the sexes and individual consent. Marriage’s public purpose or function is the procreation and education of children. this function requires a suitable form, so early laws discouraged or outlawed bigamous, polygamous, adulterous relations as inconsistent with marriage, the proper education of children, and hence the interests of society; public opinion was more severe than the laws. the Founders also made efforts to bring surrounding nations toward the peaceful adoption of monogamous, lifelong marriage.[9]

The belief that sex is a social construct, or that gender is not determined by biology is all an attempt to undue not only the so-called patriarchy, but the very principles the nation was founded upon. It defies the self-evident, irrefutable truths that keep men free and connected to God. This has been the Marxist agenda all along and they will do what ever is necessary to achieve it.


Sunday, October 13, 2019

The Failure and Capitalization of Gun Control

On Thursday, October 10, Fox 13 reported that two people were killed from a shooting in a mobile home park in Tampa Florida. According to the article, which is only credited to Fox 13 Staff, there is no clear motivation for the shooting and the suspects are still on the loose. It is unclear how this could have happened because Florida passed its Red-Flag law immediately after the Parkland Shooting. Since that time more than 2000 people have had their guns seized based on nothing more than hearsay and speculation about what a person might do, and in the meantime, murderers are still getting away with murder. While groups like Everytown for Gun Safety claim Red-Flag laws to be an astounding success, the truth is that they do nothing but focus police efforts on people who probably have no intention of committing a crime while the criminals are still roaming free. As is the case with all gun control laws.  

Red-Flag laws are on the books in fifteen states across the country. They violate nearly all aspects of the bill of rights by denying an individual due process before their property is taken on mere suspicion. In most cases, it is up to family members or law enforcement to file for an “extreme risk protection order” against someone they feel may be a danger to themselves or others. After an individual’s guns have been confiscated, they must file a petition with the court to set a hearing a date where they will then have to prove there was no reason to confiscate their guns. In other words, gun owners are now guilty until they can prove their innocence. How did we reach such a point in America where a fundamental principle like the presumption of innocence is so callously thrown away?

In 2013, I wrote the article “The Culture Changing Pop-Tart.” Elementary School student Josh Welch was being suspended from school because his anti-gun, liberal teacher accused him of biting a pop-tart into the shape of a gun. Young Josh claimed he was trying to make a mountain but that didn’t matter to the teacher. The school insisted their actions were necessary to keep the other students safe, from a pop-tart gun. Since this time there has been a series of related incidents. The most recent was the suspension of a Colorado High School student for posting pictures of him and his mother shooting at the range. There was another incident in Kansas with a twelve-year-old who is now facing felony charges for pointing a “finger gun” at other students after her classmates asked her what five students she would kill if she could. This is a gray area because, in my opinion, this does cause some concern but doesn’t warrant felony charges. According to Cam Edwards from, two other students from the same school district were caught bringing real guns to school but no charges were pressed against them because there was no evidence they were going to use them. That makes perfect sense.

The truth is that there is a deliberate effort coming from the Department of Education to brainwash our students against guns. The News Education publication, “Educator Guide: The Battle Over Gun Control,” clearly shows how the education system presents a one-sided argument in an attempt to sway the opinions of students into accepting restrictions against their rights. Using the concept of critical theory, they present the pro-gun argument and the anti-gun argument but only provide the studies and statistics of the anti-gun side. They are encouraging students to criticize their own culture to affect social change. In the video below, Eric Holder can be seen describing how to change the public perception of America’s firearm culture. 

Guns in America were once viewed as a proud tradition of free and independent people. After years of effective conditioning and teaching techniques, such as active shooter drills and suspending students for displaying any support for gun rights, they are creating a culture of fear and uncertainty. Just as they are with other mass hysteria movements like #metoo, where the presumption of innocence is also thrown to the wayside.

The truth is that you cannot stop murderers from murdering. You can, however, capitalize on the failures of gun control by pushing for further restrictions until the ultimate objective has been achieved. California has had some of the strictest gun laws in the country and was one of the first to pass Red-Flag laws. Governor Newsom recently signed fifteen new gun control measures into law. They have upped the ante and now allow teachers, employers, and co-workers to file “red-flags” against anyone they deem to be a threat to themselves or others. Governor Newsom said that no state does it as well as California, according to Kristen Mitchell. He also said there is so much more they need to do. Therein lies the point. Governor Newsom knows these gun control measures will not stop murder. They will allow him, however, to take advantage of their failures and make the argument that because gun control doesn’t work, the only answer is an all-out repeal of the second amendment. The more gun control fails, the more the people who feel the need to act will call for further restrictions. Florida’s Red-Flag laws are an abysmal failure because they are confiscating guns from people who have done nothing wrong while there are currently two murders on the loose.

Red-Flag laws are not needed. It is already against the law to make threats of violence and a person can be charged with a crime and prosecuted for doing so. In many cases concerning Red-Flag laws, individuals who have been deemed to be dangerous are simply left alone after their guns have been confiscated. They are not arrested or charged with a crime. If they are a threat to themselves or others does it not stand to reason that they may commit an act of violence with something that kills far more people than a rifle? Like a knife or a hammer?

Red-Flag Laws must be opposed on all levels and those that exist need to be repealed before all gun owners are deemed a threat to themselves or others simply for owning a gun.  

Wednesday, October 9, 2019

Someone else's eyes

Sometimes it snows when what you need most is to see the sun's brilliant light piercing the dark dreary clouds.

Sometimes you search for a smile when all you all find is a sad, sullen frown.

The winter always ends, and life begins anew. Skies once gray now shining brilliant blue.

Put on a smile, savor the clearing skies.  You just may be the light in someone else’s mourning eyes.

David Risselada

Sunday, October 6, 2019

The climate mob: Government needs brainwashed minions to demand change

The climate hysteria is reaching its peak as more and more we are seeing what a government-controlled education system is doing to the minds of our younger generations. Millions of school-aged children are being bombarded daily with climate propaganda designed to frighten them into becoming political activists. As Dr. Stephen Jackstadt writes in Environmental Education: Turning Kids into Political Activists”, the environmental movement is largely dead and discredited in the eyes of the public, but one place that it is still going strong is public education. While this paper is from 1995, it presents a clear picture of the indoctrination taking place in the classroom concerning environmental issues. After decades of constant fear-mongering, is it any wonder we see children demanding an end to life as we know it to save the planet?

The federal government has been in control of public schooling since the Department of Education was created under Jimmy Carter in 1979. If the schools are teaching climate activism and pushing global warming alarmism, it is because the government has a vested interest in students believing it. Students allegedly organizing climate strikes, and lobbying Congress to take action to save their futures is the culmination of an education agenda that goes back more than thirty years. According to Jackstadt, the textbook “Environmental Science: The Way the World Works,” was encouraging school-aged children as early as 1993, to call their congressman and senators and demand further regulations on automobile fuel standards. Furthermore, the textbook went on to suggest that any further delays would be “intolerable.” These days, the climate change agenda is woven into the fabric of all educational programs from math to English.

What interest would the government have in indoctrinating our children into believing human beings are destroying the planet? The United Nations has a sustainable development agenda which was once known as Agenda 21. It has now become known as Agenda 2030 and the goal is to destroy capitalism and institute global government on the basis of trying to save the planet while eradicating inequality. While the goals may seem noble enough, they would be accomplished through government dictate, meaning a complete end of freedom. While many people would argue that the United States should leave the U.N., the fact is our involvement has been mandated by law since 1945 with The United Nations Participation Act. This law committed the United States to full participation in the U.N. while authorizing the president to appoint representatives and commit the United States military to conflicts based on U.N. objectives. To be more specific, congress would retain the power to determine the size and terms of military deployments, but the power to determine what would constitute the type of crisis warranting their use would be solely up to the United Nations Security Council. That is a complete loss of American sovereignty in and of itself because the power to wage war, according to the U.S. Constitution, rests with the United States Congress alone. It was because of the provisions of this law that President Truman was able to commit troops to the Korean War without the consent of congress and instead, the vote of the U.N. Security Council on the pretext of an international emergency.  The same could be said for many of the wars and police actions that would soon follow.

In 1973, President Richard Nixon committed the United States further to the goals of the U.N. and the push for global government by signing HR 6768, The United Nations Environment Program Participation Act. This act, Public Law 93-188 made it U.S. policy to contribute funds to the United Nations in a coordinated, international effort to protect and improve the environment. The basic premise behind the sustainable development agenda is that the United States and the world's wealthy owe the rest of the world a climate debt for destroying the environment and raping third world countries of their natural resources. While there is a concentrated effort to indoctrinate American students into believing their own country is solely responsible for the destruction of the planet, the fact remains that China produces more carbon dioxide than America and the European Union combined. No one is demanding China reduce its emissions.

If the United States government is committed to assisting the United Nations in achieving their environmental goals, then it would stand to reason to assume that the Department of Education is helping smooth the transition from freedom and capitalism to global government. Students, after all, are being taught that capitalism is responsible for catastrophic climate change. While many Americans reveled in the fact that President Trump backed away from the Paris Accords, education secretary Betsy Devos did not hesitate to commit U.S. schools to promoting the U.N. agenda. While the public perception is that the president is protecting America’s interest, the education system continues to indoctrinate our children right under our noses.

Thousands of scientists have debunked the man-made climate change myth, and despite the fact that no clear evidence exists which supports the claim, children will continue to believe it as long as the schools teach it. This is because our education system now revolves around the use of stimulus-response conditioning techniques, and the push to create the ideal citizen that will fall in compliance with government dictates. In 1969, The then-named U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare released a report entitled Reducing Behavior Problems: An Operant Conditioning Guide for Children where operant conditioning was defined as the following.

In its simplest form, operant conditioning involves the systematic use of consequences to strengthen and weaken behaviors under specified stimulus conditions. Operant behavior is strengthened by some consequences called reinforcers and weakened by other consequences called punishers. Withdrawal of reducing consequences will also weaken behavior. This process is called extinction.

What this essentially means is that our children are being rewarded for expressing views favorable to government interests and punished for not. This is how children are brainwashed into advocating for policies that go against their own interests.

Sunday, September 8, 2019

America on the Edge: Revolutionary Courts, Red-Flag Laws and Gun Owners as Enemies of the People

The Democrat party is openly identifying with Communist ideology as they continue to push for outright gun bans, population control and the power to determine what we eat. America is at a dangerous crossroad and the common theme being pushed among conservatives is that we must re-elect Donald Trump or lose the country to socialism/communism forever. While this may seem to be the case, Donald Trump is openly advocating for the implementation of Red-Flag laws and other gun control proposals. Whether or not he goes along and signs them into law remains to be seen. Red-Flag laws are a threat to liberty not only on the individual level but bring America frighteningly close to the same conditions that transformed the Soviet Union into a full-blown police state.

American gun owners, those that understand the meaning of the second amendment and how liberty depends on it, have become the target of a massive discrediting campaign. The left works incessantly to portray the patriot as a bigoted white supremacist who poses a bigger national security threat than Islamic terrorism. They organize massive protests to foster an illusion of discontent in order to force change, not only in the way of gun control but any issue they disagree with.  In 1963, a list known as the forty-five goals of the Communist party, from the book The Naked Communist, was presented to congress. One of these goals was to use student riots and protests to discredit any attempt to shut down communist programs. While many people have attempted to shrug this list off as a hoax, there are some striking correlations to what occurred in the Soviet Union during the Bolshevik revolution.  

For example, a group that was considered central to seizing power for the dictatorship of the proletariat, the Petrograd Revolutionary Military Committee, or PRMC, used a tactic called “stirring up the revolutionary spontaneity of the masses.” (The Black Book of Communism, p. 54) This is exactly what it sounds like. An attempt to whip up hatred and discontent against what the Communists were referring to as enemies of the people.

The task at hand is to break up the old order. We, the Bolsheviks are not numerous enough to accomplish this task alone. We must allow the revolutionary spontaneity of masses who are fighting for their emancipation to take its course. After that, the Bolsheviks will show the masses which road to follow. Through the PRMC it is the masses who speak and who act against their class enemy, against the enemies of the people. We are only here to direct the hate and legitimate desire for revenge of the oppressed against their oppressors.  (The Black Book of Communism, p. 54)

In other words, they are deliberately stirring up hatred for the American patriot because we stand in the way of their communist objectives.

The Trump administration is considering the creation of a social media system, called HARPA which would enable big tech companies to identify potentially dangerous people through their online activities. This is coming at a time when Red-Flag laws will likely become our new reality. This is nothing but a new way to create lists of people that the government has deemed to be, as Hillary Clinton would refer to us, deplorable and not worthy. Enemies of the people, according to the Black Book of Communism, were anyone that obstructed the efforts of the Bolsheviks. Lists naming those to be considered enemies were published and distributed to party members. After these lists were published it was decreed that anyone whose name appeared on these lists were to be rounded up and arrested. Here is where it becomes more pertinent in relation to Red-Flag laws. Those that were arrested were brought before the “revolutionary court,” a court that was set up specifically for abolishing the previous legal system and all laws found to not be in accordance with the socialist revolutionary party. (The Black Book of Communism, p. 55)

Red-Flag laws turn our legal system upside and violate our most basic human liberties. It has been determined, just as it was in the old Soviet Union, that you are already guilty and pose a grave danger to society. There is no legal standard which supports the implementation of these laws, they are nothing more than a convenient way to target those the communists in our government view as a threat. These revolutionary courts were used as a weapon to put down the emerging counter-revolution to the growing power of the communist state. As the guided hatred of the American gun owner continues to grow, it is quite possible that Red-Flag laws will be used in the same way.

As Dimitry Kursky, the people’s Commissar of Justice from 1918 to 1928 recognized, the revolutionary courts were not courts in the normal bourgeois sense of the term at all, but courts of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and weapons in the struggle against the counter-revolution, whose main concern was eradication rather than judgment. (The Black Book of Communism, p. 55)

Many people may read this article and shrug it off as a conspiracy theory and nothing more. If the Democrat party was not openly declaring their intentions to confiscate guns and implement population controls, that would be understandable. The fact is, they are. Regrettably, Donald Trump seems to be leading the push for Red-Flag laws which turn our justice system upside down and an inescapable social tracking system that will identify people as dangerous for expressing patriotic views. The United States government already considers people concerned about illegal immigration and gun control to be right-wing extremists. When Red-Flag laws go into full effect there is sure to be resistance. Any opposition to the “reasonable” Red-Flag confiscations will only be used to further the narrative that gun owners and others expressing views that go against the mainstream are dangerous and should be considered enemies of the people.  

Sunday, August 18, 2019

America's Red Flag Warning: Take Responsibility for Ourselves or the Government Will Do It For Us

Sitting in the quiet stillness of a Sunday morning, sipping black coffee from my “I am your father” Darth Vader mug, I find myself reflecting on a personal experience pertinent to what we are facing as a country. These days a person couldn’t be taken seriously if they didn’t acknowledge that there is something off in our society. People seem to be losing it. Emotions are boiling over and people are being driven into fits of rage over socio-political issues that in all reality, shouldn’t even exist on the level they do. Since when in our country do people write manifesto’s and then go on a shooting spree? Manifesto’s no less that just happen to fit perfectly into the mainstream narrative describing what the social justice warriors should be infuriated about. Why are we as Americans, having to deal with the issue of red-flag laws and the seemingly inevitable lock down of our society?

Yes, something is wrong and there are many theories pertaining to what it may be. The removal of Christian prayer from the public-school system is one theory. Another is Feminism and the destruction of the American male. These are topics that I have written about many times and they are legitimate points of interest that explain a great deal. There is something else underneath that ultimately, in my opinion, may have been the catalyst that started it all. As Americans we forgot who we are, and the responsibilities we have to each other and maintaining freedom. We have given up the obligation of self-governance and allowed the government to move in and take responsibility for the things we should be answerable for. We became too enthralled by the pursuit of material goods, wealth, social status and prestige that we forgot everybody matters. Don’t misunderstand me. This isn’t some social awakening to the left’s misperceived evils of capitalism; you won’t be seeing me at the next Antifa or Occupy Wall Street protest anytime soon. Let me tell you my story.

To some it will seem like no big deal, to others it represents only a tiny fraction of what they go through in their daily lives. To me, well, to me it gave me something to think about and now I’m doing what I do. I am working armed security at a large industrial plant while I’m completing my master’s degree at Liberty University. We run three shifts with several officers on each. Most of the time the days are very uneventful, in fact it can be a pretty boring job. One day we received a call about a man making threats to come in and “shoot the place up” and then take his own life over social problems he was experiencing. Do you see where this is going? This brings the issue of red-flag laws front and center because we must act. My first thought was that I wasn’t going to let anybody get away with that while I was there for fear of it being used as an event to push gun control. Anyway, the individual in question was known to carry a gun. That in and of itself is no big deal, but he is making threats. When he arrived on property at the beginning of his shift, I intercepted his vehicle and asked him to get out of his car. At this point I really had no idea what I could be facing, but as he proceeded to exit the vehicle, I immediately ascertained the man, to my great relief, was not a threat to anyone. He did have a firearm in his car, but so does everyone else most likely. He was not in possession of a conceal carry permit however, and it is against company policy to bring a firearm on the property without one.

Luckily, after a thorough investigation we were able to determine the alleged threats he made to harm others were exaggerated rumor but, the threats he made to take his own life were not. Our actions just may have saved him from committing suicide. Think for a moment about what police officers go through on an everyday basis. Again, I urge you to not misunderstand my position. I am not a newly appointed leftist advocating for gun control on any level here, but just imagine what police officers go through. There is a legitimate concern among law enforcement and the general public no less, about how to keep firearms out of the hands of dangerous people.

Red-flag laws, to the people that are uneducated about how such things can be abused, seem like a reasonable solution. They are not, they will turn our society upside down. Red-flag laws are more than a draconian tool to suppress freedom and target political enemies however; they are a consequence of our failure to police ourselves and look out for one another. Just like my situation at work, there are already systems in place that enable authorities to intercept and stop people that are making credible threats from carrying them out. Making threats is against the law, and a person can be arrested and charged with a crime for doing so. The shooter in Parkland Florida for example, could have been stopped several times over for the threats he made but the school, out of a fear of losing funding in Obama’s promise program, ignored the threats. This was a complete failure of systems already in place and it is the American people that will suffer the consequence.

Yes, arguments could be made about the removal of prayer from school and the destruction of masculinity as being the root cause of many problems we face in America. I think we also need to realize we have a responsibility to each other. When was the last time you reached out to a person in need? When was the last time you asked that one person that everyone else was harassing and teasing because they are different, if they were oaky, or if they needed help with something? Sometimes that one act of kindness can be all it takes to make a difference in someone’s life. I mean, we can’t continue the way we are going now. Something has got to change and if we fail to take responsibility for ourselves, the government will be forced to move in and do it for us.