The Most Likely Reason For Disarming Social Security Beneficiaries
On July 18, the Los Angeles Times reported that the Obama regime is seeking to ban gun ownership for Social Security beneficiaries if they lack the mental capacity to manage their own affairs. This has the potential to affect about 4.2 million people; about 2.7 million are now receiving disability payments from Social Security for mental health problems, and another 1.5 million do not manage their own finances for a variety of reasons.
If taken at face value, the Obama regime is seeking to strengthen background checks for gun ownership in an effort to prevent mass shootings, while critics say that the move conflates people who merely have memory problems or difficulty managing finances with people who are violent and dangerous. But we should remember Reece’s razor; whenever there are several possible explanations for a government action or policy, the most cynical explanation is the most likely to be correct. Let us find a more cynical explanation.
Let us begin with a few basic truths. Whenever politicians seek to disarm people, it is generally because they are either afraid of those people and/or because they seek to do something to those people that will be more difficult if those people are armed. If there is a state within a geographical area, then a certain group of people are exercising a monopoly on initiatory force within that area. Those people necessarily have a monopoly over the law, as no other group of people has the means to force their will upon everyone else. Thus, the law means whatever the leaders of that group say it means.
In this case, those who are unable to manage their own affairs are considered to be those with “marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease.” For the moment, anyone who has been declared incompetent to manage pension or disability payments and assigned a fiduciary is considered to meet the above definition. But as explained above, they have the ability to change this to target anyone simply by redefining the sufficiently vague terms “subnormal intelligence,” “mental illness,” “incompetency,” “condition,” or “disease” to suit their liking.
Why would those who wield state power seek to disarm elderly and disabled people? The most obvious answer is that they are preparing to do something to those people which would lead them to retaliate against the state, and are therefore afraid of those people. The most obvious candidate for this activity is a significant reduction in retirement and disability payments to the elderly and disabled. Recent government reports show that unless a change occurs, Medicare will be insolvent by 2030 and the Social Security trust fund will be depleted by 2034. After these insolvencies occur, Medicare payments will be reduced by about 20 percent and Social Security payments will be reduced by about 25 percent even if no changes occur to reduce them further, such as continued shrinking of labor force participation and a combination of rising interest rates on the national debt and hyperinflation brought on by irresponsible Federal Reserve policies.
This could be the difference between an elderly or disabled person being able to tread water financially and such a person becoming insolvent, and this is going to make people angry enough at politicians and their minions to try to harm them. A move to disarm elderly and disabled people suggests that the Obama regime knows that a financial storm is coming which can make these insolvencies occur sooner than predicted, along with the accompanying social unrest. To be perfectly blunt, they want to grab guns from these people so that these guns cannot be used to shoot at them (or their successors) in the near future. It is hard to imagine a more cynical explanation than this, so it is most likely to be correct. Prepare thyself accordingly.
<<Planned Parenthood and Ukraine: There Is No Such Thing As Non-Lethal Aid+++++++++++A Measure Of Fascism In America>>