More Authority For Mental Health Agencies Not A Solution To Mass Shootings – Dangerous Course
More Authority For Mental Health Agencies Not A Solution To Mass Shootings – Dangerous Course For Civil Liberties
After another tragic mass shooting, this time in a Florida high school, Americans are once again caught in a whirlwind of emotion, anger, fear, and debate. As per the usual, the mainstream corporate press has launched an undeniably biased anti-gun campaign that has the nation debating whether or not unalienable rights are actually unalienable. The gun argument aside, however, there is another topic being discussed in relation to the shooting as a possible solution to such incidents in the future – greater “mental health” programs and interventions.
The argument is simple since virtually no rational person would deny that an individual who would open fire on innocent people must have some level of mental health issues. The argument is thus that mental health services should be more available and that they should also have more authority to intervene. The former point is not contentious and it shouldn’t be. Unfortunately, the latter point doesn’t seem to be too contentious either and it should.
Like the medical industry, the psychiatric industry (which is firmly connected to Big Pharma and the police state), already has a broad range of assumed and legally backed authority. In fact, it’s a safe bet that most Americans don’t know just how much authority their mental health “authorities” actually have. They don’t know that these individuals are able to make subjective judgments on others with no basis in fact or logic that result in the detention, arrest, evaluation, hospitalization, and medication without consent. This isn’t the police state of the future, it’s the police state of today.
Keep in mind, these subjective decisions aren’t even made only in situations that warrant immediate concern; i.e. a patient is hallucinating demons and believes he should kill his mother who is possessed by a demon. Those situations exist, of course, but so also do situations that involve no risk to others such as delusions, depression, and paranoia. This practice is sold to many on the basis that someone suffering from these diagnoses could harm themselves or others. In other words, on the basis of pre-crime and completely devoid of the basis of individual rights not to be detained, kidnapped, held hostage, and medicated against their will by someone else who thinks they know what is best for them.
But while some readers may be checking out of this article because they aren’t depressed, delusional, or paranoid and thus believe that forced evaluation could never happen to them, it has taken place for much less than what many would consider a mental health issue. Many Americans have found themselves arrested, forcibly confined to the psych ward of their local hospital, and even forcibly medicated as a result of a temporary state of anger or sadness, a misunderstanding due to a clinician’s ignorance, or a political opinion.
Numerous people have been forcibly confined to a mental health facility in the so-called freest country in the world for questioning the official story of 9/11. Some of these stories have been published and some have not. This writer has discussed the ordeal with more than one person who expressed doubt of the official story of 9/11 and was subsequently “reported” to mental health “authorities” (for their mental health safety, of course) by friends or family. These individuals were promptly visited by police, taken to the hospital psych ward, evaluated by mental health staff who obviously believed the official story, and either kept for three days or remanded to a psychiatric center. One individual was only able to escape the clutches of the psychiatric facility by feigning being cured of thoughtcrime.
There is only one direction in which society can go from this point if something isn’t done to reign in the power of the psychiatric “authorities.” These “authorities,” like every other “service” that soon became an “authority,” will continue to lobby for more power, receive more power, and use that power. Mental Health “authorities” will become the arbiters of what speech is allowed to be spoken and what thoughts are allowed to be pondered. And there is no question about this claim. They are already doing so today. It thus only stands to reason that, given more power, they will not only continue but accelerate their behavior in the future.
Indeed, the slippery slope is not speculative in this case because the world has already witnessed a society that used psychiatry to control its population. In the Soviet Union, psychiatry was abused to the point that tens of thousands were imprisoned in horrific mental institutions simply for dissent which was most likely categorized as “sluggish schizophrenia” or “paranoia,” the go-to diagnosis of any oppressive regime. Of course, numbers of the victims have been estimated to be much higher as a result of intense concealment of the data by Soviet and current government officials. This is the reason that many Eastern European countries have such a cultural resistance to any psychiatric or mental health services to this day, legitimate or otherwise.
The point being made here is not that mental health services (counseling, etc.) or even psychiatry is bad but that granting them the authority to determine a person who has committed no crime should be imprisoned and medicated undoubtedly is. In fact, it is an unconscionable violation of individual rights. It is important to ask yourself, what right do you or anyone else have to forcibly detain and medicate another person if that person is doing nothing to harm you or to harm someone else? It is time for Americans to at least ask the question of why these professionals have been allowed such power and why they should be allowed to keep it. After all, in a free country, one should be free to have a delusion even if that delusion is that you are free in the first place.
Brandon Turbeville – article archive here – is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He is the author of six books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies,Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria,and The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President. Turbeville has published over 1,000 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com.