Mens’ sense of entitlement

Elliot Roger felt entitled to favors from women, or so the women on the radio said today. Would it not be great if such pronouncements solved a problem? The women on the radio even went so far as to declare it is a characteristic of men to expect women to submit or they will rape and kill them. Sheesh.

It would suit me if this were Thanksgiving Day because I am so thankful I am a distance away from these sickos.

I open doors for Dawn because I expect her to submit? I think this crazy notion comes about because we now worship government. The government inspects meat, makes the workplace safe and makes stupid people save for retirement. If any of these systems fail it is nobody’s fault because the government is nobody.

Language is only a series of labels so we can relate to each other. But these women show it has its limitations. To say I will rape and kill my wife if she does not “submit” varifies these NPR nitwits as nonessential.

The drug war is the same sort of nonsence. Zohydro is a new drug that some want banned because it can be crushed and used in a way that could cuse addiction. It is long acting so it overcomes the drawback of a boom / bust cycle in pain killers. People in extreme painare expected to suffer because somebody might get hooked on thid drug.

The focus on the substance is a cop-out, the same as the generalizations about Elliot Roger. 

9 responses to “Mens’ sense of entitlement

  1. “Elliot Roger felt entitled to favors from women, or so the women on the radio said today.” It wasn’t just these NPR women who stated this about Elliot Rodger, it was Elliot Rodger himself who articulated such in a youtube video:

    This is another one of those “black swan” events that brings-out all of the opportunists, those who use the savage event as a bully-pulpit to broadcast whatever the pet cause might be of the specific opportunist. These black swan events have occurred throughout history, but today, owing to the rapidity of reporting and the ubiquitous nature of the media and Internet, we hear about these tragedies almost instantly. They are the perfect vehicle for sensational magnification and miss-reporting to provide the needed shock value to one’s reporting — “if it bleeds, it leads.” That stated, it is interesting to note that, with ever increasing liberalization of gun laws in the U.S., gun crime has declined and continues on a downward trajectory. But none of this will be reported by the MSM.

  2. One other comment, Elliot Rodger had been in therapy since he was eight-years-old and was seeing therapists every day in high school. He had a history of violent threats and psychical assaults and the police had already gotten involved. He was on multiple prescription medications and had therapists whom he alerted to his plans by sending them his manifesto.

    In a country where a little boy with a pop tart chewed in the shape of a gun triggers immediate action, the professionals who cashed in on the killer’s wealthy family were in no hurry to call the police. One even reassured his mother while the shootings were going on that it wasn’t her son.

    So it was obviously the fault of the gun he used . . . (seldom mentioned is that he also used a machete, a knife, and a hammer to kill his three roommates and tried to kill using his car as a battering ram). Where is the indictment of the “professional” psychiatrists and psychologists who allegedly “treated” Elliot Rodger for years and years, and who more obviously completely failed him and his victims?

    Jenni Rodger, his British aunt (brother to Elliot’s dad), blamed America and guns for her nephew’s massacre. “What kind of a society allows this? How can this be allowed to happen? I want to appeal to Americans to do something about this horrific problem.”

    Somehow the parenting failure of this woman’s brother is now the fault of an entire foreign country.

    Rodger’s father issued a statement through his lawyer in support of gun control and “staunchly against guns.” It might have been more useful if instead of opposing a category of manual instruments; Peter Rodger had spent more time dealing with his son’s problems. But hey, if one can push-off the blame onto the failures of society, the monkey jumps-off Peter Rodger’s back.

    Everyone but the narcissistic killer is responsible for his shooting spree. The problem is tackled with public awareness hashtags and zero tolerance legislation. And the media falls right in line with this malarkey.

  3. “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.” However, people with guns can kill more people, more quickly and at a greater distance.
    We need to limit the availability of guns to people who have such deep seated mental/emotional problem that they are in daily therapy for those problems. That is NOT gun control. That is mass killer control..

    • Guns are not running around shooting people. Guns are inanimate objects and tools of self-defense. If one is killed, whether at a distance, or up close, and whether the death is instant or the dying prolonged, the fact is, one is still just as dead in either case. Would death by drone be more appetizing to the victim?

      “We need to limit the availability of guns to people who have such deep seated mental/emotional problem that they are in daily therapy for those problems.” Excellent idea! But how would this be enforced in a free society where most healthcare and especially psychiatric care, are businesses operated by for-profit physicians or institutions?.

  4. Health care professionals, including mental health professionals, clergy, etc. are required in some states to notify law enforcement of threats. Such information could be used to restrict people who are threats to themselves and others from buying weapons, obtaining licenses/permits. Background checks are smart, not a limitation of gun rights.

    Guns are inanimate objects and SHOULD BE tools of self-defense. The problem in this and many similar cases in recent years is that those inanimate objects have been used not in self-defense, but in mass murders by deranged individuals.

    The distance and speed issue relates to the number of deaths a person can bring. Someone with a semi-auto or auto rifle and large magazine can kill more people in 60 seconds than can a person with a switchblade knife. The manner of death does not matter to the individual victim, but the number of victims is far greater.

    • Good intentions don’t guarantee good outcomes. Elliot Rodger was treated by psychiatrists and clinical psychologists since grade school (don’t know about any clergy being involved). Yet none of these healthcare “professionals” ever notified the authorities that Elliot Rodger was a danger to society. Either they were inept, or they liked the routine paychecks from the family of Elliot Rodger too much to be the cause of losing a portion of their income by alienating Elliot’s family — a result that surely would have occurred had they reported the deep mental problems that afflicted the kid. These mental health gurus are first and foremost human. It is easy to rationalize away the severity of the mental illness of an Elliot Rodger, especially if one’s livelihood is at stake. Thus the requirement by some States to report possible threats by deranged people is really not enforceable and is just so much window dressing to make the politicians appear that they care and have done something.

  5. Well put, Fred.
    In addition, I think out of all the recent mass shootings only one was in a place where guns were legally carried. Some sane person with a gun could have saved countless lives. I wrote about a school in Texas where the teachers were notified they may carry a gun and the administrators knew who took advantage of that. But no one else did. Bad place to go shoot ’em up, eh?

  6. Don’t know what the disclosure vs. patient privacy laws are in California. In some states mental health practitioners are prohibited from disclosing the dangers their patients pose to others. Such laws need to be changed. that might not solve the problem of greedy, uncaring practitioners that Frederick John mentions, but I prefer to think that such are a distinctly small number.
    A few years ago Texas passed a law permitting pastors to carry concealed firearms in churches. I’ve always wondered what effect that law had on giving in church offerings.. .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s