It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Governement may target the guns of ATS members

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 11:00 PM
Recently there has been lots of talk on the forum by ATS members about preventing the mentally unstable from owning guns. Let me give you one example of why this might not be such a good idea, and it involves yourselves.

There has also been talk of conspiracy theorists being labelled as mentally ill.

A disturbing piece was published in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. In it is a study that claims people who are anti-government or believe in conspiracies around the government are suffering from a condition called Anti-Government Phobia (AGP)

Anti-Government = Mental Illness According to Study

Congress to Pass Bill: Conspiracy Theorists Mentally Ill

So even if you're anti-governement then you can be considered mentally ill, and if you're mentally ill then you can't own a gun.

How do you think they find out who the conspiracy theorists are? Perhaps by looking at who visits conspiracy websites, such as ATS. Your ISP is now required by law to keep a record of your internet browsing history.

Also, we've already had one of our members (albeit unpopular) involved in a shooting which doesn't help matters.

edit on 16/12/12 by polarwarrior because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 11:08 PM
reply to post by polarwarrior

So even if you're anti-governement then you can be considered mentally ill, and if you're mentally ill then you can't own a gun.

How convenient.........

That's par for the course I suppose.
What ever it takes to rid those people with guns that are wise to the governments antics....

Just don't admit openly that you own a gun.......
Fight for the right of others without bringing attention to oneself.

edit on 16-12-2012 by snarky412 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 11:11 PM

I still have active security clearances and everything I own is documented, registered, and legal. They already know what I own.

But if browsing a website classifies me as mentally unstable...

Come get 'em.

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 11:14 PM
Yeah, all they need is an excuse to railroad you into a forced hospitalization and you lose your right to own a firearm under federal law.

They're already campaigning to get parents to essentially rat out their children, and Bill Bennett was talking about monitoring Internet usage today on Meet the Press.

I'd say it's coming, but in reality it's already started. They're just going to try to make it easier to access and share information I'd wager.

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 11:19 PM
Terrible boating accidents happen all the time, boating accidents where all the firearms on board are lost and unable to be recovered. Such a shame really, its terrible when a nice collection meets a watery end like that, all that rust and rot.

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 11:27 PM
So the eighty percent of people who think that our government is messed up are insane? Well, now I am starting to feel a little like I fit in better with society.

There aren't ten percent of the people in the country that completely trust the practices of the government. The people who do are a little naive.

That doesn't mean that we are going to start shooting anyone. There are a few loose cannons out there, they should easily be able to find them by asking a few local people.
edit on 16-12-2012 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 11:33 PM
reply to post by polarwarrior

history does not repeat itself,
but sometimes it rhymes

so they're trying to pull the old anti-gov=crazy again?

the DSM also known as The Big Book of Mental Illness is a tool of political and social control. it's definitions always change to suit the political tides.

Is Schizophrenia Really a Black Disease?

Who decides what "insane" means? This was the major question of Ken Kesey's countercultural classic "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," which illustrated how mental illness could be deployed by the establishment to crush the individual. But a recent book by University of Michigan psychiatry professor Jonathan Metzl suggests that Kesey's novel might not have been far from non-fiction. In "The Protest Psychosis: How Schizophrenia Became a Black Disease," Metzl documents the shifting interpretations of schizophrenia through the 20th century, tracing its evolution from a "white middle-class woman's disease" to an "African-American man's disease." Specifically, with the political upheaval of the civil rights movement, popular culture began to associate angry black men with schizophrenia, which in turn influenced the way doctors interpreted and diagnosed the illness.
"In particularly the early 1920s, 1930s, 1940s when the idea of schizophrenia itself was first coming to the United States from Europe there was a general assumption that persons who suffered from schizophrenia were either shy or calm or they were geniuses," Metzl says. "It was often represented as an illness that afflicted white novelists or poets and as I say, these were very often in popular and psychiatric representation assumed to be white people." But during the massive societal upheavals in the middle of century, ideas of sanity and insanity took on new meaning. "All of a sudden in the 1960s, American culture, newspapers, magazines, movies start to represent angry African-American men as in part being inflicted with a new form of this particular illness," and this change in popular perception of the disease directly influenced the clinical definition of it, Metzl argues. "All of a sudden in 1968, the second version of the Diagnostic Manual comes out and there is new language that says 'aggression, hostility, projection.'" The image of a schizophrenic person was all of a sudden more violent and unstable than the schizophrenic of 20 years before.

The practical consequences of this popular-cum-clinical shift in perception was that in the 1960s far more African-American men were institutionalized in psychiatric wards with schizophrenia. "Some had committed crimes, some had participated in civil rights protests, some had been participants in urban riots at the time. They all passed through various forms of the penal system and ended up diagnosed with schizophrenia and locked in the psychiatric wards," says Metzl. But were these men really schizophrenic? Or were they victims of shifting clinical definitions of disease, one that was prone to metaphoric interpretation?

How Schizophrenia Became a "Black Disease"

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 11:52 PM
Does this mean i get free benefits and medical care from the government because i got the anti government disease and i don't think i'll ever get cured for it. Oh and I wont be able to work anymore either because my pay check involves taxes, which involves government. ahhgggg i need mahh pills!

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 12:14 AM
OK, everybody hold on. I don't know if the OP is aware that this is a hoax, but apparently no on else has caught on.

There are two pieces of evidence that make it pretty plain:

1. At the end of the earlier (2005) post that the OP links to, you'll find this little note:

[Edit: dear ouy gnihtyreve eveileb tnod, siht si os, eritas si yrots aionarap lacitilop troper tfiws eht]

Which, of course, mirrored, says:

[the swift report political paranoia story is satire, so is this, dont believe everything you raed: tidE]

2. A search of a phrase from this so-called report ("Anti-Government Phobia has a worldwide distribution, but has a particularly high incidence in the United States") does not turn up any such report. It turns up a lot of blogs where the so-called report is being discussed (example)--and again no one seems to catch this little tidbit:


By "Ivor E. Tower, M.D."?

"IVORY TOWER"? Get it?

Also note that the original is posted in the Jokes, Puns, & Pranks forum. In other words, it's nothing more than a slightly belated (4/18/2005) April Fool's joke....

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 12:17 AM
You know part 2 of this mentally ill argument is that I noticed years ago that you're MUCH more likely to be declared mentally ill if you have good enough insurance to cover the cost of treatment .

So stop being afraid , with obamacare right around the corner they will be able to take you away and get you fixed . And if they can't cure you of this silly conspiracy nonsense in short order , there will be plenty of money for them to keep trying for a long long time .

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 12:19 AM
reply to post by polarwarrior

For the record: I use the ATS site for "entertainment purposes only"......

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 12:26 AM
Eric Holder is mentally unstable, go after his guns.

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 12:40 AM
reply to post by Ex_CT2

Ahh good catch.

Still it worrying if they ever do manage to classify it as a mental illness, but for now it seems we're good.

edit on 17/12/12 by polarwarrior because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 01:03 AM
Read this thread and you will see the real mental health disorder that will be used against people like us.

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 01:17 AM
What sucks is that they're basically telling everyone they're being monitored, analyzed, and judged. It's not even a little bit of a secret, they're finished playing that game, HA!

I guess the cat has been out of the bag for awhile, may as well own up to it!

ALSO! I too would like to know if there are any benefits to be had for those that suffer from this terrible illness.
edit on 17-12-2012 by MmmPie because: TOO ADD

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 01:28 AM
When I was a kid the days and weeks following Halloween must have been Hell on my parents. They would try to ration my candy out to me, and I'd pester them, non-stop, until the candy was gone.

One year my father obviously had his fill. After trick or treating he told me "It's yours. Do whatever you want with it.". I was in shock. An entire pillow case, filled with candy, and all mine. MINE!

Not only did I eat so much candy that night that I ended up missing two days of school from it. But I was also out of candy for the next month, while all the other kids were still enjoying theirs.

In the following years, I never again asked to be in charge of my own Halloween candy. I didn't even think about asking. I just handed the haul to my parents and let them meter it out to me as they'd always wanted to do.

I'm not saying that Uncle Sam is a benefactor with good intentions, as my parents were. But I do see the world we currently live in as an analog for the candy thing. In the eighties the Brady Bill passed and the NRA began spending absolutely obscene amounts of money getting it repealed and building up an overwhelming, nearly sexual, public love of all things guns. The bigger, the better. No limits!

Now? Well, we're seeing a society that has eaten itself sick - just as I did as a kid.

The government won't have to take anybody's guns - when the time comes - the people, or at least the majority, will beg for the government to do so. Uncle Sam didn't have to stage false flags, brainwash poor kids, create Manchurian candidates, or anything of the like. He merely had to let us have our pillow case full of candy - and then to sit back and watch human nature take its course.

edit on 12/17/12 by Hefficide because: anybodies? anybody's? meh, I dunno which is right.

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:46 AM
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo

How sweet are that little roses?? Ahww
I can see no harm in that

Nice collection btw

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 05:51 AM
I don't understand what the problem is.

Don't people own guns to stop the government taking the guns away? They are there for a reason.

I somehow doubt they'll actually be used for the reason the second amendment suggests.

top topics


log in