 For purposes of
analyzing crime in America, I shall define it as it is
defined in the "new America": A politically correct socialist democracy. Law is
whatever the Ruling Power wishes it to be, by command or prohibition.
As the "Rules of Law" (rules of action) have neither a moral
or amoral basis, crime can be an oxymoron, as it is today in America. It’s a
crime to murder. It is not a crime to murder an unborn human being. It is a
crime to stop someone from murdering a child in the womb. It’s a crime to
counterfeit. It is not a crime to inflate (counterfeit) currency, as the
Government does. It is a crime to consider someone guilty until they prove their
innocence. It is not a crime to deny someone their Liberty, Rights and Property
and find them guilty until they prove their innocence. Even then, people
frequently never recover their Rights and Property after it is determined they
are innocent. Liberty is gone. It is a crime to violate the Constitution to a
point where the sovereignty of America is sacrificed. It is not a crime to enter
into political entanglements where the sovereignty of America is sacrificed.
It is a crime to be in possession of drugs the government has
deemed to be illegal. Unless of course, you rank with those who are obviously
above the law. The list is endless and does not change for the better with
Republicans or Democrats If anything, the current Bush administration makes
Clinton’s look like one based on morality and constitutional government, if that
were possible.
As we are now a Fascist / Socialist nation (private
ownership/government control) ruled by a Command Class and there are no
"Absolutes" in Socialist countries, the above contradictions make "sense." The
Command Class in Socialist States always consists of amoral man gods, who make
their own will and appetite the definition right, wrong and law. To break the
law one need only go against their dictates (be politically incorrect). To be
"within the law," just do as your told, no questions asked.
Laws (the rules of action) in America, had their roots in the
Mosaic Law / Ten Commandments as chiseled in the walls of the Supreme Court and
referenced in our Declaration of Independence… "The Laws of Nature and Nature’s
God". There are no laws on the books stating…. "Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt
not steal etc. etc." These were accepted as givens "Self evident" by the
Founders. What we called law was nothing more than penalties for breaking God’s
commandments. Today we have laws justifying murder, justifying stealing,
justifying plunder and on and on. Nothing is self-evident anymore, except the
fact nothing is self-evident.
Morality……. The Creators code of conduct for happy living
Immorality…. Having a heart felt understanding of morality but
breaching the code.
Amorality…. Denying the Creator and making your own will and
appetite your code of
Conduct.
Socialist orchestrate their agenda by implementing Karl Marx
ideas, coupled with Darwin’s theories. A thesis: Constitutional government
exercised by self-governing people must/has been brought in conflict with the
Anti-Thesis, (Freedom from self-government/the victim mentality) resulting in a
Synthesis, the rise of the POLICE STATE. It is an inescapable fact, if we fail
to self-govern we will be governed in the same manner as beasts of burden.
The Bureaucratic POLICE AGENCIES with regulatory powers that
supercede justice and legislated law ie: the EPA, OSHA, FDA, FCC, SEC, D of A,
HEW, IRS, Homeland Security etc. etc., have all come into being with the
assertion from the Socialist we have failed to self-govern (which in to many
instances, we have) in many of the areas these bureaucracies were formed to
"correct.". We are guilty until we prove our innocence in a bureaucratic
governmental system. If we still had our forsaken Constitutional government,
then these "crimes" would be dealt with in the Judicial, not Regulatory, arena.
The accused would be considered innocent until proven guilty. As it is,
Bureaucratic (regulatory) government, the government within the government, (a
socialist creation) it declares people guilty without the benefit of their
having their day in court. Bureaucratic government is another definition of a
POLICE STATE. The shift in power from the Legislative branch to the Executive
and its bureaus having judicial power, is evidence of this fact. Believe it or
not, the only Federal Bureaucracy at the time of the signing of the Constitution
was the Post Office.
The rise in crime is a result with one of two solutions. One,
reinstitute moral instruction, accountability and self government in a good way
(see education section) so we can start reducing the size of the police
agencies, but better yet, get rid of the lot of them.
Two, continue to build the POLICE STATE, the hearts desire of
the socialist man gods.
Socialist ideas on how to deal with the rise in crime their
policies have created are not the solution. Dealing with the Socialist and their
"value system" as criminals is the only solution, that is if you like the idea
of having control over your life, liberty and property.
Consider the "prisons" we’ve been building to stem the tide of
crime. As we get away from self-government our homes, cars, businesses etc. are
all being outfitted with alarms and detection devices: Walls against the
outside. Legitimate Businesses and Businessmen? The socialist have convinced us
their only goal is "criminal" self-interest. We need a socialist standing
between us and everybody we might have the occasion to do business with; after
all the socialist are our "parent" there to "protect" us. "We need 100,000 more
cops on the street…Clinton" (a stronger police state) instead of a return to
morality so we won’t need that 100,000 plus 100,000 already added to the roles.
Al Gore stated…"We need an additional 50,000 cops on the street." Bush topped
both of them with Homeland Security, Patriot 1&2 and all the other executive
orders and pieces of legislation his accomplices in crime in the legislative and
bureaucratic governments have let become our lot in life.
Think about it, there are TWO kinds of Police Officers: One is
employed to protect and serve God and Country; the other is hired to REGULATE
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. History teaches all societies are susceptible to, and
always have, caved in to the latter by virtue of apathy on the part of the
employers (citizens) when it comes to assuming their necessary role of
overseeing the actions of their employees in government. Consider the policies
of the Nazis and Communist that are now being brought to bare in our country.
Gun owners with integrity not found in government, they are
criminals. In your own mind run a graph. Over the last 50 years, as the
socialist have gained an ever increasing foot hole in American society, 20,000
or more gun laws aimed at legitimate citizens have been perpetrated on them.
During that same period, the rise in crime both in the street and in government;
it has risen proportionately with the gun laws, if not higher. The socialist
admit to the rise in crime in the street (orchestrated by their policies) but
never to their gun laws ineffectiveness. Maybe it’s time to cast a jaundiced eye
on socialist and their agenda? After all, if the government is afraid of you,
the legitimate gun owner, don’t you think that is reason to fear the government?
Of course! Drug use, suicide amongst all ages, divorce,
aimless mass murder, drive by shootings, car jackings, children conceived out of
wedlock, murder for a pair of sneakers, killing for the fun of it, school
shootings, abortions (murders of the unborn), gangs, white collar crime, the
military being used as an occupation and conquering force and all sorts of other
crimes are on the rise. If they aren’t, its because we’re building better
prisons around ourselves and quicker ways to respond to criminal behavior, not
because we are restoring moral conduct. The socialist agenda; doing away with
self-government (accountability to a Higher Power and self respect); it’s
working. In order to control people’s lives, liberties and properties, you must
have or create justification for that control.
The following excerpts are from Lt. Col. Dave Grossman’s book,
"On Killing"…The Cause of the Problem: Taking the Safety Catch off of a Nation
We know, as surely as we know that we are alive, that the
whole human race is
dancing on the edge of the grave…
The easiest and worst mistake we could make would be to blame
our present
dilemma on the mere technology of war…It is our attitudes
toward war and our uses
for it that really demand our attention. Gwynne Dyer "War"
What is the root cause of this violence in our society? An
application of the lessons of combat killing may have much to teach us about the
constraints and control of peacetime violence. Are the same processes the
military used so effectively to enable killing in our adolescent, draftee
soldiers in Vietnam and now Iraq being indiscriminately applied to the civilian
population of this nation?
The three major psychological processes at work in enabling
violence are classical conditioning (a` la Pavlov’s dog), operant conditioning
(a` la B. F. Skinner’s rats), and the observation and imitation of vicarious
role models in social learning.
In a kind of reverse "Clockwork Orange" classical conditioning
process, adolescents in movie theatres across the nation, and watching TV at
home, are seeing the detailed, horrible suffering and killing of human beings,
and they are learning to associate this killing and suffering with
entertainment, pleasure, their favorite drink, their favorite candy bar, and the
close, intimate contact of their date.
Operant conditioning firing ranges with pop-up targets and
immediate feedback, JUST LIKE THOSE USED TO TRAIN SOLDIERS IN MODERN ARMIES, are
found in the interactive video games that our children play today. But whereas
the adolescent Vietnam and now Iraq vet had stimulus discriminators built in to,
hopefully, ensure that he only fired under authority, the adolescents who play
these video games have no such safeguard built into their conditioning.
And, Finally, social learning is being used as children learn
to observe and imitate a whole new realm of dynamic vicarious role models, such
as Jason and Freddy of endless "Friday the 13th" and "Nightmare on
Elm Street" sequels, along with a host of other horrendous, sadistic murderers.
Even the more classic heroes, such as the archetypal law-abiding police
detective, is today portrayed as a murderous, unstable vigilante who operates
outside the law.
There are more factors involved. This is a complex,
interactive process that includes all the factors that enable killing in combat.
Gang leaders and gang members demand violent, even killing, activity and create
diffusion of individual responsibility; and gang affiliation, loosening family
and religious ties, racism, class differences, and the availability of weapons
provide forms of real and emotional distance between killer and the victim. If
we look again at our model for killing-enabling factors and apply it to civilian
killing, we can see the way in which all of these factors interact to enable
violence in America.
All of these factors are important. Drugs, gangs, poverty,
racism, and guns are all vital ingredients in a process that has resulted in
skyrocketing violence rates in our society. But drugs have always been a
problem, just as drugs (alcohol and so on) have always been present in combat.
Gangs have always been present, just as combat has always taken place in
organized units. Poverty and racism have always been a part of our society
(often much more so than today), just as propaganda, class divisions, and racism
have always been manipulated in combat. And guns have always been present in
American society, just as they have always been present in American wars.
In the 1950s and 1960s students brought knives to school,
whereas today they bring .22s. But those 22s were pretty much always present at
home. And while there is new weapons technology available, fifteen minutes with
a hacksaw will make a pistol out of any double barrel shotgun, a pistol every
bit as effective in close combat as any weapon in the world today – this was
true one hundred years ago, and it is true today.
The thing we need to ask ourselves is not, Where did the guns
come from? They came from home where they have always been available, or they
may have been bought in the street thanks to the drug culture – which deals in
illegal weapons as readily as it deals in drugs. But the question we need to ask
is, what makes those children bring those weapons to school when their parents
did not? And the answer to that question may be that the important ingredient,
the vital, new, different ingredient in killing in modern combat and in killing
in modern American society, is the systematic process of defeating the normal
individual’s age-old psychological inhibition against violent, harmful activity
toward one’s own species. Are we taking the safety catch off a nation, just as
surely and easily as we would take the safety catch off a gun, and with the same
results?
Between 1985 and 1991 the homicide rate for males fifteen to
nineteen increased 154%. Despite the continued application of an ever-increasing
quantity and quality of medical technology, homicide is the number-two cause of
death among males age fifteen to nineteen. Among black males it is number one.
The AP wire article reporting this data had a headline announcing, "Homicide
Rate Wiping Out Whole Generation of Teens." For once the press was not
exaggerating.
In Vietnam, and later in Iraq, a systematic process of
desensitizing, conditioning, and training increased the individual firing rate
from a World War 11 baseline of 15 to 20 percent to an all time high of to 95
percent. Today a similar process of systematic desensitization, conditioning,
and vicarious learning is unleashing an epidemic, a virus of violence in
America.
The same tools that more than quadrupled the firing rate in
Vietnam are now in widespread use among our civilian population. Military
personnel are just beginning to understand and accept what they have been doing
to themselves and their men. If we have reservations about the military’s use of
these mechanisms to ensure the survival and success of our soldiers in combat,
then how much more so should we be concerned about the indiscriminate
application of the same process on our nation’s children?
Lt. Col. Grossman’s book spells out in undeniable facts just
what the socialist amoral approach to moral definitions is all about. When men
make their own will and appetite the distinction between right and wrong
conduct, the end result has always been and will always be the total destruction
of their society.
Consider the Jury system. It was our last line of defense
against crime in and out of
government. Government "Of the people, By the people and For
the people" was best illustrated in this system. The first vote we cast as
Americans is for the legislature. They write the laws (or use to) at our
pleasure. Regulations from bureaucracies and Executive Orders have, to a great
extent, replaced them. The second vote we might cast is as Grand Jurors. At this
moment in time we, not the government, determine if the accused should go to
trial based on the outstanding law and the evidence. Twelve people have equal
power with all the Prosecutors, Legislators and the President combined. The
third vote we have is as Jurors. THIS IS WITHOUT DOUBT, THE MOST POWERFUL OFFICE
IN THE LAND. When Constitutional government was the law of the land, the Judge,
as an officer of the court, his power was nothing more than a referee. The jury
was empowered to not only judge the conduct of the defendant but to judge the
law itself. Their decision was to come by giving recognition to the higher law
that use to be in our hearts, again, referenced in the Declaration of
Independence. The Judge was not empowered to select the evidence the prosecution
and defense wanted to offer to the point he, representing the state, could
determine the outcome of the trial by omission or commission. Judges were not
empowered to charge the jury to the point the states "will" would be done.
On the other hand, as lack of self-government has become
prevalent in our society,
courtesy the socialist indoctrinators in our education system,
juries can be loose cannons instead of humble servants meting out justice from
the heart. The beneficiary of this situation? You guessed it, the State.
WARNING! If we continue to criticize the Jury System instead
of coming to the realization Socialist indoctrination is dumbing us down to a
point it is getting almost impossible to pick a jury capable of meting out
justice, and let the Command Class legislate it out, we will lose the
opportunity to judge THE LAW as well as the Defendant. WE WILL OF A CERTAINTY
BECOME SLAVES TO THE LAWS OF THE STATE.
You’ve all seen the show "Law and Order" or others like it.
You’ve seen how the Prosecutors and Defendants Lawyer reference case decisions
as the precedence for the actions taken by the Judge in the case they are
currently trying. No two defendants are subject to the same law (ABSOLUTES) as
the ability of the lawyer they can afford plays a large part in the outcome.
Technicalities have replaced justice. The Lawyers, on either side, research into
case histories frequently determines the outcome. This is socialism at its best.
Where is the Law stating Lawyers and Judges must set aside their integrity and
reason and try a case knowing the Defendant is guilty but try them as if they
were innocent? In a case where a Lawyer knew his client was guilty, he would not
compromise his integrity but recommend he HUMBLY plead guilty and trust in God
the jury would be compassionate. He would never try and cast doubt where, in his
heart and mind, there was no doubt. How can you separate integrity, reason and
ethics from justice? Before the turn of the century or thereabouts, each case
would be tried by going back to the absolutes of the Mosaic law/ Ten
Commandments. By far most defendants would be subject to the same ABSOLUTES,
law. That’s the "equality" that set us apart from the rest of the world. The
accusation was Gods law had been breached. Mans law, which consists of penalties
in varying degrees for breaching Gods law would be used by the jury as a
guideline to determine the penalty (if any) to be meted out on the defendant. In
a socialist state, the judicial system is the source of the law like Nazi
(National Socialist) Germany, Communist (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
Russia and now America. Judges are treated as gods to the point their will and
appetite (the states) is the definition of what’s right and what’s wrong. Hence
the reference to the decisions made in past cases as if they were chiseled in
stone, but in reality, they are chiseled in sand.
If we truly want to reduce crime, we must start by firing the,
would be gods (authors of the amoral rules of action) we employ every election,
and start hiring men who acknowledge accountability to God as the author of the
rules of action. We must look in the mirror and ask ourselves "what have I
become, I hired them."
Consider the socialist philosophy "law is separate and apart
from morality." As I have stated, Law has its roots in religion (heart felt
beliefs) and is nothing more than the rules of action, emanating from those
beliefs in science (creation) as well as human relations, nothing more. What is
the basis of all human relations if they are not moral, immoral or amoral? When
the socialist say law is separate and apart from morality, in their world; this
is true. Their religion/law is based on amorality, satisfying their own will and
appetite.
The truth speaks for itself and its laws cannot be gotten
around. It is founded on absolutes, not wills, moods, opinions or political
correctness, always in a state of flux. People who see their will as paramount
might do what is right but they reserve the right to do something else.
Consider these other passages from "On Killing" by Lt. Col.
Dave Grossman. It is a study of humans killing humans. The only book of its
kind, as far as I know. It not only searches into motivations and reactions to
killing in war but in society as well. If you have any doubts about the media’s
influence on violence, this book gives the unequivocal answer.
Here is a brief passage for your consideration…"When people
become frightened, or angry, they stop thinking with their forebrain (the mind
of a human being) and start thinking with their midbrain (which is
indistinguishable from the mind of an animal). They are literally "scared out of
their wits." The only thing that has any hope of influencing the midbrain is
also the only thing that influences a dog: classical and operant conditioning.
That is what is used when training firemen and airline pilots
to react to emergency situations: precise replication of the stimulus that they
will face (in a flame house or flight simulator) and then extensive shaping of
the desired response to the stimulus. In the crisis, when these individuals are
scared out of their wits, they react properly and they save lives.
This is done with anyone who will face an emergency situation,
from children doing a fire drill in school to pilots in a simulator. We do it
because, when people are frightened, it works. We do it not to tell
schoolchildren what they should do in case of a fire, WE CONDITION THEM; and
when they are frightened, they do the right thing. Through the media, we are
also conditioning children to kill; and when they are frightened or angry, the
conditioning kicks in.
It is as though there were two filters we have to go through
to kill. The first filter is the forebrain. A hundred things can convince your
forebrain to put a gun in your hand and go to a certain point: poverty, drugs,
leaders, politics, AND THE SOCIAL LEARNING OF VIOLENCE IN THE MEDIA – which is
magnified when you are from a broken home and are searching for a role model.
But traditionally all these things have slammed into the resistance that a
frightened, angry human being confronts in the midbrain. And except with
sociopaths (who by definition, do not have this resistance), the vast, vast
majority of circumstances are not sufficient to overcome this midbrain safety
net. But if you are not conditioned to these midbrain inhibitions, then you are
a walking time bomb, a psuedo- sociopath, just waiting for the random factors of
social interaction and forebrain rationalization to put you at the wrong place
at the wrong time.
Another way to look at this is to make an analogy with AIDS.
AIDS does not kill people; it simply destroys the immune system and makes the
victim vulnerable to death by other factors. The "violence immune system" exists
in the midbrain, and conditioning in the media creates an "ACQUIRED DEFICIENCY"
in this immune system, the victim becomes more vulnerable to violence enabling
factors, such as poverty, discrimination, drug addiction (which can provide
powerful motives for crime in order to fulfill real or perceived needs), or guns
and gangs (which can provide the means and "support structure" to commit violent
acts).
Canada is a nation we have always considered to be relatively
crime-free and stable. Stringent gun laws, comparatively intact family
structures beloved and paternalistic government. But (surprise!) Canada has the
exact same problem we do. According to the Canadian Center for Justice, since
1964 the number of murders has doubled per capita, and "attempted murders"
increased 6 per 1,000,000 in 1964 to 40 per 1,000,000 in 1992. And assaults went
up from 209 per 100,000 in 1964 to 940 per 100,000 in 1992. This is almost
exactly the same ratio as the increase in violent crime in the U.S. Vast numbers
of Canadians have caught the virus of violence, the "acquired violence immune
deficiency," and as they ingest America’s media violence, they are paying the
inevitable price."
The Media industry tells us violence and lewd sex in
programming does not influence our thinking then turns to a potential advertiser
and tells them the message in their ad influences our thinking. Which is it?
What’s obvious is obvious.
My position on crime? Start by doing away with bureaucracies
and return to Constitutional government. Aside from saving us a lot of money, it
will bring back the proposition: We are innocent until we are proved guilty.
Reinstate the idea there is a Creator in our educational system who holds His
people accountable for their actions. See the education section. Publicize the
Ten Commandments as chiseled in the walls of the Supreme Court as the underlying
law of the land. Start interpreting the Constitution by giving recognition to
the transcendent law that was the basis for its interpretation. Teach
accountability is to "the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God" first, last and
foremost. Would you rather be held accountable to those preaching political
correctness?
In short, restore morality so we can dismantle the police
state.
|
