With Red Flag Laws in Mind…

Is racism dangerous to the public?

Is religion dangerous to the public?

Are social phobias dangerous to the public?

Is an unkempt yard, grounds for investigation?

Does an unacceptance of climate change require re-education?

What are the acceptable parameters for social conformity to avoid investigations or legal persecution?

With public safety in mind, how far are we willing to go to ensure acceptable social interactions and good order and discipline?

How far will you be willing to go to avoid being identified as a possible risk to public safety?

When everyone is a yelp reviewer, make sure you are always on your best behavior…you never know who may be observing and reporting.

Advertisements

31 thoughts on “With Red Flag Laws in Mind…

      1. That’s right! If people really take a look at what Bush did with both Patriot Acts, they will see that it gives them the power to nullify the Constitution due to martial law. That is what REX84 is all about. That is why they keep causing all the chaotic violence with Operation Gladio type false flags. Their motto is “Order out of chaos.” Bush even stood in front of the Pentagon on 9/11 and said “Don’t worry, we’ll bring order out of this chaos.” They say it right out in the open, but not enough people knew about the Scottish Rite Masons (Illuminati) back then. We do now! The Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission, CFR crew are real serious about building their one world government for satan. They are desperately trying to disarm Americans and take our rights because we are the only ones left standing in their way. Never give up your guns people, never!!! Fight the NWO! I’m glad you bring these issues up brother, God bless!

        1. bottomlesscoffee007

          Thanks Ryan. The more power we happily hand over to our rulers, the more we will pay for our ignorance.

  1. Weeeeeeell…your questions are very interesting.

    I would say (and this is only my opinion, so don’t quote me) that there are both wholesome and harmful ways of thinking in abundance. I am all for those who make a conscious effort to be positive, healthy wholesome. Positive conversations and examples are needed.

    Even the best of people have the occasional harmful or unhealthy thoughts. Most of us know to stamp those thoughts out, never to dwell on them, chase them away.

    Any kind of thinking,wholesome or harmful thinking starts within someone’s head, and then is firstly manifest in smaller ways, and within an isolated environment. Yet people effect people – for better or worse, and it is concerning that harmful ways spread, families, groups of friends, clubs, communities, an entire populace. And it is scary to see people become impassioned with an idea that is clearly a stone’s throw away from violence.

    OK…now I am waffling. But I would say yes racism can be very dangerous to the public, it concerns me greatly. I would say there are some religious ideas that are wholesome and some that are harmful (I am not going to specify here). As for social phobias – I am not sure which you have in mind, but it’s not unusual for people to be cautious or nervous about things or people that are unfamiliar to them, but of course that does not excuse mistreatment or discrimination.

    An unkempt yard??? Well, I must admit, I noticed an unkempt yard on the street where Goldfinch lives (he lives in a very lovely neighbourhood) and I had to investigate it. It turned out that the occupants of that house had been through a heart-breaking loss, and I was all for helping them get their yard sorted out. I had already mown Goldfinch’s lawn and cleaned his house from top to bottom, I was ready for a new project. A pleasant living environment can effect someone’s emotional well-being and dignity.

    Climate change – what kind of education? Since I can remember school and the media have been drawing attention to the damage that human commercial activity was incurring. But people choose to think what they want to. There is so much information in the media about what is harming the environment. For example here in England there was a media report last week that basically said that it would make more difference if people gave up eating meat (especially beef and lamb) than avoiding air travel. Thirty years ago when I was at school I remember the teachers telling us that within thirty years there would be no fossil fuels left to burn so mankind had to switch to alternative energies. Who can make the real difference? – is it the big manufacturers? is it farmers? is it Joe Bloggs and what he eats or whether he chooses to have solar panels on his roof? is it the government’s responsibility to tell the others what they can eat, farm, make and how to do so? I would like to think the vast majority of people are concerned about pollution and climate change, but huge amount of information available and not all of it in agreement, can be confusing, even to those of us who are deeply concerned.

    Some of your latter questions – I am not sure I understand the specific issue you are referring to. Is there a conflict between rights to privacy and public safety??? For me, it’s easy to say, yeah if it makes the world safer, then the police are welcome to come into my home and search for anything harmful because I don’t think they would find anything (my kitchen knives???) But I hear people getting all upset about facial recognition technology and police carrying out random searches. If someone is very dangerous in their thinking, then they might be rather clever. The police can’t search the mind or the thoughts of every individual. So these awful acts, like someone hiring a van and driving it onto a pavement to harm people – the challenge of identifying whose thinking is becoming warped and dangerous enough to prompt them to commit such evil actions is huge.

    Forgive me if I misunderstood the latter questions you raise?

    Now…have you been practising the juggling? because I think there are more than a few who would love to see that on your YouTube channel.

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      Thanks for the concise answers Caramel. My follow up question then is, since you are fine with the police coming into your home, in the name of public safety, would you expect others to be fine with the police in their home as well?

      Caramel, do you think that if someone doesn’t quite see the world as you do, then they should be “checked out”.

      See what attention an unkempt yard can bring.

      I’m actually decent at juggling tasks!

      1. It’s an interesting question.

        When I was growing up (I am one of seven children) there came a stage when as children, we wanted own space, and privacy became important to us. That was natural – as babies, three of is in the same bathtub was no big deal, but it is natural as you become older to want privacy. What people may think in the privacy of their minds or do in the privacy of their own homes could be quite frightening if exposed.

        Now – you may know this, but I am in love with someone wonderful. The two of us are different in some ways. I am an open book for the most part. I wear my heart on my sleeve and I tell even my most embarrassing stories and regrettable mistakes.

        My beloved is perhaps not quite as open as I am. I have to respect that. When I was over there, one day he opened a drawer in front of me to fetch something and something else caught my eye and made me raise an eyebrow. When a comment slipped out of my lips he indicated that it was none of my business. Fair enough, he has every right to privacy.

        But I guess in some ways when someone one becomes too defensive about their privacy, it can make your trust in them a tiny bit shaky. I know that people might think differently about certain things. But if you are hiding things, worried about what others would think, does’t it indicate that even you are not really comfortable with that.

        I am not sure what this idea of “checking-out” is pointing to? Forgive me I just don’t think I am understanding this question. Is this an intelligence agency invading someone’s property to search for signs of explosives, weapons, hateful propaganda materials??? We live in a world where there are millions (perhaps more) different points of view. We don’t all have to be the same.

        I have been vegetarian since I was six years old – simply because I went off meat – there was not much thought about my decision. I have never looked into animal welfare of the effect on the climate of farming meat. I have just not had any interest in eating meat. No strong feelings about it. And I love cheese but I have a dairy intolerance, so I end up with a 99% vegan diet. But that is for totally different reasons from some who have become vegan for other more provocative reasons. I might eat like they do, but I certainly don’t think the same way.

        Some police are scary, I don’t know if they realize it. But if they were ever allowed to go into random people’s homes to do random searches, I think they would have to dignify and respect people.

        I think I am waffling again – it’s partly because I don’t understand the questions, and partly because it’ easy for me to be open. but I think a lot of people would be very uncomfortable with their privacy being threatened.

        1. bottomlesscoffee007

          You’re probably open, because that is who you are naturally. There is nothing wrong with that. You do what you are comfortable with.

          In the same breath, we do not know all the secrets of our government, yet our government convinces us that in order to promote public safety, we must be forthcoming with our secrets and insecurities.

          My question is, if public safety is paramount, who gets to decide what is and what is not acceptable? And…what freedoms are we willing to voluntarily sacrifice to achieve public safety?

          Who pays the ultimate cost and who enforces safety?

      2. I think I forgot to mention my other point – if you search the home of someone clever and dangerous in their thinking, you will probably not find anything concerning. But the danger is what they are allowing to breed in their mind. If they are clever, they will hide that until they see an opportunity to do what they have been thinking.

          1. Fortunately, for the most part dangerous thoughts are usually betrayed or manifest in smaller ways before more serious ways.

            But….can humans alone identify and address the harmful thoughts of other humans?

            1. bottomlesscoffee007

              That’s the question, how does a body prove the intent of an individual? What exactly is a dangerous thought? Who decides what is dangerous and what is acceptable?

              Is it dangerous to expose children to transgenders?

              Is it dangerous to expose children to firearms?

              Is it dangerous for a parent to drink or smoke weed around their kids?

              Is it dangerous have beliefs that may not be popular?

              What is definably dangerous and how far are we willing to go at attempting safety?

              1. I am not going to make comment on all of those areas.

                But surely law deals with penalties for transgressions in speech and actions usually – I can’t think of any examples of people being punished for thoughts (correct me if I am wrong).

                I am very very concerned with what children are exposed to. I mentioned it to Goldfinch when I was with him. Should a child be exposed to all the possibilities this world holds. Or should they be steered towards what it is healthy and wholesome, what engenders a respect for life, for our environment?

                I have heard people say for a long time that they are not going to impose any set of beliefs on or influence their children – but rather let their children decide for themselves. That is terrifying. My parents helped me with my thinking from my earliest memories. I remember the discussions we had that touched my heart and helped me reason. Without them, I am sure I would have walked into all sorts of trouble.

                1. bottomlesscoffee007

                  Who decides what is healthy and wholesome? Who decides what is dangerous for our environment? Who decides what is respectful for life?

                  If a parent or parents decide to not influence their own children, rest assured, others will happily influence those children lacking direction and influence. Whether that be the schools, social media, pop culture, any many more outside influencers.

                  It’s funny how many adults will admit to “still figuring out life” and in the same breath, expect their kids to “figure it out for themselves” without a fraction of the life experience, they possess.

                    1. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Some would, view that as a fantasy. Or even worse, a mental disorder.

                      I believe in God as well, yet many don’t. It is quite popular today to denounce God.

                      So, with that in mind, what is considered the best life practices to promote safety and who decides what will be tolerated and what will not be tolerated.

                      Keep in mind, laws are enforced by both the left and the right. Once a law is made legitimate, it’s very hard to undo.

            2. bottomlesscoffee007

              Would you be willing to undergo interrogation of your deepest and most dangerous thoughts? Would you want to be under constant scrutiny or observation? Trusting the biases of those scrutinizing you to adjudge you accordingly?

              1. One of my best friend’s is a psychologist and she told me (again this is just her words) that under enough stress any human will break. She said it is interesting for psychologists to study and determine how that break will manifest itself. Some people harm themselves. Others harm others. She gave me a list of the different ways or classifications that the way people “break”.

                Now…after the challenges that I faced, my darkest ever thoughts were that I did not want to be alive. That’s the darkest my thinking has ever been. I have never wanted to harm anyone else, human or animal or even an object. When I was under immense stress and devastated by the crime I was victim to I was just trapped in wishing that I would not wake up the next day – and all sorts of possibilities as to how I could take matters into my own hands ran through my mind.

                But I am in a family and in a wonderful group of friends who allowed me to say how I felt and supported me to fight that thinking.

                Too many people are isolated with harmful dark thoughts though/ There is noone there to recognise a change in their mood and to help them get control of their thinking.

                I am privileged to have in my family and my group of friends many who are mature and balanced with their thinking, those who have overcome their own challenges and have wonderful practical advice and those who have worked in medical and emotional health for years. So I had a great support network.

                So many people are without that.

                1. bottomlesscoffee007

                  So again, who is the arbiter of deciding what thoughts are and are not dangerous? Who is the arbiter that decides what is tolerable and what needs to be made illegal?

                  What if an enemy of yours or a person that just doesn’t like you, decided to report you during your period of depression?

                  1. What do you mean report me? I was open and talked to my family, friends and the counsellors available to me after I was raped. I don’t have any specific enemies. My ex-flatmate Jack who did me harm, is not really my enemy. Why would he report that the crime committed against me had made me depressed? It’s kind of obvious that when you experience something so awful you might have a hard time recovering.

                    Is it a crime to have strong feelings after someone has attacked you and left you barely alive?

                    1. bottomlesscoffee007

                      It all depends on what is considered an attack and who is deciding the preferable outcome to promote good order and discipline.

                      What if a person isn’t comfortable talking with others? Should they be coerced or forced to seek counseling?

                    2. I am sorry Coffee…I am getting tired. I had a stranger push me to the ground and carry out obscene acts toward me and then beat me over the head repeatedly and try to hide my body in bushes – does that constitute an attack?

                      I decided when to end the sessions with counsellors because I found they were becoming unhelpful.

                      I am not trying to be dogmatic about anything here, I am not a confrontational person. But the man who attacked me….the trouble started in his head long ago as far as I am concerned. Did anyone realize he had an unhealthy view of sex and of women? Did a family member or friend notice? What was his choice of entertainment? Had he been in relationships were a partner was alarmed by his behaviour? I suspect there were many smaller ways that man would have manifest his thinking. I don’t think a good man with wholesome thoughts just decided to do something a bit different for one night only – do you?

                      It’s so easy for me to say because I hardly watch TV and movies (except for musicals) but I wouldn’t care a jot if we got rid of TV and the internet and found healthier ways to entertain ourselves. But there would still be the potential for evil. But nowadays through the lightning quick communications and media networks we have, it is easier to access both wholesome and harmful material than ever.

                      I am not going to volunteer myself to be a judge or go setting criteria for what is healthy and wholesome or what is unhealthy and harmful.

                      Most people agree on the major wrongs. I try to avoid controversy because everyone seems to get their pants in a twist about this that or the other.

                      I am tired now….so I am going to make this my last comment.

                    3. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Thanks for the conversation Carmel. Yeah, obviously you were attacked, I wasn’t questioning the validity of your claims. I am referencing people who claim to be “attacked” online, or “attacked” with obscene viewpoints. When I asked who decides what is and what is not an attack, I was asking who is the authority and who do we trust to decide our fate?

      3. I was thinking again about this privacy question. I mentioned earlier I come from a big family. There was no way you could hide things in out house even if you wanted to!

        Then when I moved out, I was a lodger. I rented a room from a couple. But it wasn’t 100% private. Sometimes I would be in bed when one of them would walk in to put something into the airing cupboard (which was in the room I rented). I was ok with that. Their house, their rules.

        Then I lived on an beautiful estate in the countryside. Again, not my property – a new set of rules for me to follow, which I did. little privacy, but I didn’t mind.

        Then I lived with strict vegans who are very concerned about the environment. More new rules, which I again followed.

        Then as a volunteer, I was provided with basic accommodation. Three of us girls shared a bedroom. We had a house-keeper. While we were at work the house-keeper or anybody who had been asked to carry out a repair might enter our room (we would not even know about it). And there were occasional checks (which we were not told about in advance). Anyone who had something that showed a complete disrespect for all we were working towards (such as helping in areas devastated by war) DVDs etc featuring graphic violence (for example) would probably be asked to leave.

        You couldn’t be a hypocrite.

        1. bottomlesscoffee007

          You entered those situations voluntarily. Do you think people would want those same circumstances coming from the state, especially if they didn’t volunteer for them?

  2. ”Is racism dangerous to the public?” Well, the public isn’t racist. An individual racist could be dangerous to the public, though, in the unlikely event he/she decides to become a murderer.
    ”Is religion dangerous to the public?” No – unless it’s Islam or Satanism (or Thuggee 🙂 ).
    “Are social phobias dangerous to the public?” No.
    “Is an unkempt yard, grounds for investigation?” Hell, no.
    “Does an unacceptance of climate change require re-education?” Depends on what re-education means. If it means being re-brainwashed, then no.
    “What are the acceptable parameters for social conformity to avoid investigations or legal persecution?” Afraid I don’t get this one.
    “With public safety in mind, how far are we willing to go to ensure acceptable social interactions and good order and discipline?” I don’t entirely get this one, either. But you don’t infringe freedom in the name of “safety”.
    “How far will you be willing to go to avoid being identified as a possible risk to public safety?” Well, I don’t exactly go proclaiming my beliefs in the street. I’ll continue to live my life normally. What others think of it is their problem.
    As for yelp reviews, I think you’ll life this:
    https://www.thrillist.com/eat/nation/the-types-of-yelp-reviewers

Please Like This Post, Follow and Comment to Aid in the Discussion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.