If you’re actually to be given the power to ban something, or to ban somebody from having something…

…Shouldn’t you at least be required to know what the f*ck you’re talking about?

The problem with expanding this is that, you know, with the advent of PTSD, which I think is a new phenomenon as a product of the Iraq War, it’s not clear how the seller or transferrer of a firearm covered by this bill would verify that an individual was a member, or a veteran, and that there was no impairment of that individual with respect to having a weapon like this.

Really, Dianne? Since the Iraq war?

O, my good lord, why are you thus alone?
For what offence have I this fortnight been
A banish’d woman from my Harry’s bed?
Tell me, sweet lord, what is’t that takes from thee
Thy stomach, pleasure and thy golden sleep?
Why dost thou bend thine eyes upon the earth,
And start so often when thou sit’st alone?
Why hast thou lost the fresh blood in thy cheeks;
And given my treasures and my rights of thee
To thick-eyed musing and cursed melancholy?
In thy faint slumbers I by thee have watch’d,
And heard thee murmur tales of iron wars;
Speak terms of manage to thy bounding steed;
Cry ‘Courage! to the field!’ And thou hast talk’d
Of sallies and retires, of trenches, tents,
Of palisadoes, frontiers, parapets,
Of basilisks, of cannon, culverin,
Of prisoners’ ransom and of soldiers slain,
And all the currents of a heady fight.
Thy spirit within thee hath been so at war
And thus hath so bestirr’d thee in thy sleep,
That beads of sweat have stood upon thy brow
Like bubbles in a late-disturbed stream;
And in thy face strange motions have appear’d,
Such as we see when men restrain their breath
On some great sudden hest. O, what portents are these?
Some heavy business hath my lord in hand,
And I must know it, else he loves me not.

William Shakespeare, Henry IV, Act 2 Scene 3, written a few years before either Iraq war.

I mean, we’re always getting “common-sense” this and “common-sense” that thrown in our faces. Isn’t it just common sense that somebody with that kind of power should at least be vaguely knowledgeable about…

Oh. Yeah. Silly me. Never mind.

About Joel

You shouldn't ask these questions of a paranoid recluse, you know.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to If you’re actually to be given the power to ban something, or to ban somebody from having something…

  1. David Liddy says:

    Actually if you go back to Leviticus, it discusses what returning warriors must do to “decompress” and cleanse themselves and their minds of horrors of war and battle. (And remember that it was much more up close and personal back then.)

  2. MamaLiberty says:

    I can’t think of any culture in the world (no, I don’t know about all of them) except the US that does not have some sort of ritual or provision for a cleansing transition from battle to ordinary life in some fashion – even for full time warriors.

    Of course, I reject standing, professional armies – as well as the idea that anyone has the right to “ban” anything for the rest of us, regardless of how much they know about it.

    Stupidstein fails on all counts.

  3. billf says:

    Figures that Diane,with all the worldly experience from doing NOTHING and going NOWHERE except the land of fruits and nuts,would come up with an assertion so condescending to all soldiers since time began ,to say that only recently has anyone been affected by being at war.
    She just keeps giving her constituents reasons to not re-elect her,but they don’t ever get it.
    Bill

  4. alex says:

    Reading the book “On Combat: The psychology and physiology of deadly conflict in war and peace,” the author makes a good point that PTSD has been around for centuries, just that every generation gave it a different name. The thing is that, PTSD would be considered the medical name of it but it has gone by the names shellshock, soldiers heart, combat fatigue, gross stress reaction and battle fatigue. But PTSD doesn’t necessarily only occur in military personnel, all that is needed is a traumatic event in a persons life. They are just worried about the military personnel that have it because of training and the violent and deadly events that led to them getting PTSD. You are going to react differently to say getting raped than if you were in combat. Where you might just become obsessive about the people around you and your locations, etc., you are not going to react violently unlike what a person who has gone through combat situations. Whereas both are PTSD cases, the only one they are worried about is the combat one.

  5. Jim Bovard says:

    Joel, that’s a wonderful Shakespeare quote to illustrate the absurdity of the contemporary hubbub on PTSD. Thanks for the reminder of how Shakespeare nailed many things long before the latest round of psychobabble from today’s experts & “leaders.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *