So this troll came out from under his Liberal Bridge and shared his feelings.
It got me thinking. He/She/Xe (trying to cover the gender thing issue) apparently feels offended that guns are integral part of the human right of self-defense being this the most basic of rights. Now, good liberal boys and girls and other made up genders just love to have Gun Control all the way to gun confiscation till nobody but the Government-Selected ones (Military and Police) have guns. So what happens if we apply their ideas on Gun Control to Health care? Here’s three of them right out the top of my head.
Universal Background Checks on buying ANY medication or medical device. Imagine every time you need a simple bottle of ibuprofen or a box of band aids or even a tube pr Preparation H, you are forced to fill a government form, have a background check performed and wait 3 to 5 days before Walgreen’s can sell it to you.
I you are convicted of a felony, declared mentally incompetent or found guilty of misdemeanor Domestic Violence, you simply are forbidden to receive health care. If you happen to be in an accident and paramedics arrive, you are first to be subjected to a background check. If you fail, you get to die. But if you, my God’s good grace happen to survive, you will be tried for a felony that can carry up to 5 years in jail and $200,000 in fines. A variation of this was tried “successfully” in Europe in the middle of last century. You may want to check the Aktion T4 program and its aftermath.
The carrying of medication/medical devices outside your home is strictly forbidden. Hey, You need that insulin shot ASAP but you are at work? Or you need to go to work, but need the use of a cane or walker to move? Bubba, you are in deep shit. And if you have a pacemaker, an implant, or even a titanium screw inside your body, you can never leave home.
I think that should do it.
–No medical care at all if you’re under 18, a ban on certain popular kinds of medical care if you’re under 21. You’re too immature to know what’s good for you and you’d only hurt someone with those aspirin anyway.
–Police officers and the bodyguards of the rich can have any kind of medical care or first aid they want, even if those categories are banned for use by the rest of the country. Your cultural superiors deserve the best protection. Know your place, peasant.
–A three-day waiting period for antibiotics, anesthetics, and other commonly-abused forms of medicine. Must make sure you’re not going out all hot-headed and buying painkillers just because you’ve got a surgery coming up.
–All doctors must be registered with the federal government, their books open for inspection at any time and any error in paperwork leads them liable to fines or loss of license. Actually, I kinda think this would be a great idea anyway.
–Anyone who supports increased freedom of health care is to be referred to as a “Baby-doser”, “medicosexual”, or simply “murderer”.
“I you are convicted of a felony, declared mentally incompetent or found guilty of misdemeanor Domestic Violence, you simply are forbidden to receive health care.”
Weren’t the Progressives in favor of measures like this back in the early 20th century? Went as far as to sterilize a lot of people for having “undesirable traits”.
(sarc)Thankfully the modern left doesn’t show any sign of that mindset!(/sarc)
(And then I see you covered this, at least the European expression of it. It was also a Big Idea in the US, at least among the people Hillary has openly declared to be her “intellectual forefathers”.)
Margaret Sanger, Founder of the not so cute and cuddly Planned Parenthood was into eugenics. Her overwhelming desire was to keep undesirables like blacks, Eastern Europeans, and Italians from having large families. Zombie has an archive of her writings.
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=1953
Tommy Douglas, the godfather of the Canadian Liberal Party was also into eugenics. Kate McMillan of “Small Dead Animals” has a series of post about his actions and his writings about eugenics, “Tommy Douglas, Not Dead Enough.”
Progressives have always been about getting rid of their enemies or undesirables. Progressives like Hitler, Stalin and Mao were very successful at it
While I like the intent of this post, the actual analogy does not help. Granted, your intent was tongue in cheek, but there is risk in posting something like this.
Looking at this from a SJW perspective, they dislike guns because innocent people are directly harmed by others. Mostly by others committing crimes, but sometimes by others. And the ones committing crimes FAR outweigh the accidental/negligent discharges.
On the other hand, there are very few incidences of people using pharmaceuticals/medical devices to deliberately inflict harm. Yes, things like using sudafed to manufacture meth exist, but the overwhelming majority of the time, drugs and doctors are used to heal, not harm.
And, some SJW will take your post seriously, and shred your argument, and then declare victory.
I’m confused. Firearms, like medications, are overwhelmingly used to protect and save life, just like firearms.
Conversely, illicit drugs like heroin, destroy lives, just like the rare criminal misuse of guns.
Seems like the tongue in cheek approach works for me.
Good point!
And, thanks for the reminder.
Of course, the gun grabbers do not see it that way. They see it as using a gun for self defense is just as violently evil as using it to commit a crime, whereas using drugs to cure is not violent at all.
Tongue in cheek is fine, until the opposition takes it seriously.
Your employer can’t discriminate against you for having a medical condition, but can forbid you from treating that condition on company grounds.
So yeah if your company piss test shows you took Ibuprofen, or an anti-depressant, you can be terminated on the spot!
(Typed from an Employer-mandated Gun-free zone)
“Assault aspirin”
“High capacity pill boxes fully loaded with a 30 day supply of dangerous drugs”
Where he’s really missing the point: who pays.
ACA Obamacare is forcing, under penalty of law, everyone to have health insurance at higher rates to pay for / cover those who can’t afford it.
No one is requesting that everyone be taxed so that those who cannot afford a firearm can get a subsidy towards purchasing a firearm and ammo.
We have a right to the best defense tool available, that we can pay for ourselves.
You have the right to the best healthcare / insurance available, that you can pay for yourself.
[…] [High Praise! to Gun Free Zone] […]