The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Paul Archive
More Gun Violence: Let’s Look Beyond Politics
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Another terrible school shooting took place in Parkland, Florida last week and unfortunately many politicians and pundits have used the tragedy – as they often do – to push their own agenda. Many will use the tragedy to argue that Americans should be prohibited from owning guns. As if anti-gun laws would dissuade a disturbed or violent individual intent on causing harm. Those intent on mass murder don’t obey gun laws.

It’s unfortunate that while many are quick to demand that guns be taken away from peaceful Americans, they don’t seem to have much to say about guns when they’re in the hands of government authorities shooting innocent people. If we need any gun control, it is to get control of the guns in the hands of thousands of government employees who use them against innocent people with impunity.

For example, why do those calling for more gun control remain silent when armed federal agents raid Amish farms to stop them from selling raw milk? This shows the hypocrisy of those who call for restrictions on private firearms ownership while supporting the use of government violence as a means of controlling our lives.

Unfortunately there are many key questions lost in the race to score political points from the shooting.

Why does it always seem that the shooter in these mass killings has been on some kind of psychotropic drugs? As the New American magazine pointed out this week, at least ten high profile mass shootings have been committed by individuals who “were either on — or just recently coming off of — psychiatric medications.” The young killer in Florida was no different. According to his aunt, he had been on these medications to treat mental problems.

Why is no one questioning these medications – all of which come with labels warning of horrific side effects? Perhaps one reason they are ignored is that the pharmaceutical industry spends billions of dollars lobbying Congress.

Also, how is it possible that the FBI once again missed so many obvious clues that a violent person intent on causing massive harm to others was about to strike? Is the FBI actually this incompetent, or perhaps its focus was in other areas — like meddling in our own elections by presenting “evidence” they knew was flawed to the FISA court to get permission to spy on the Trump campaign?

We’ve heard many stories of how alert FBI field agents tried to alert their bosses before 9/11 that foreigners were taking flight lessons but were not interested in learning how to land the planes.

Is giving the federal government more power to spy on us – as they demand – the answer to stop these terrible crimes? Hardly!

Those who think that giving federal authorities greater surveillance powers might prevent mass shootings should consider that the FBI has been alerted that the latest school shooter had made Facebook posts and YouTube comments talking about his intention to be, as he put it, “a professional school shooter.” But the Bureau failed to properly investigate the tips. If the FBI fails to stop someone who openly boasts about their intentions on social media why should we believe that giving them the power to snoop on every American would increase our safety?

We cannot stop tragedies like this by banning guns. We need to look seriously into the psychotropic drugs that more and more Americans are being prescribed. We need to demand that our elected Representatives demand a real day of reckoning at the FBI. We need to keep focused and ignore those who politicize such events.

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Government Surveillance, Gun Control, Guns 
Hide 32 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Svigor says:

    While we’re at it, let’s look beyond the left’s delusional narrative of human cognitive equality, too: America doesn’t have a gun violence problem, America has a black and brown violence problem.

    Let’s face it, libertarians are lined up with the left and the cucked right when it comes to acquiescing to the delusional narrative of human cognitive equality.

    They’re all peas in a pod.

    Why does it always seem that the shooter in these mass killings has been on some kind of psychotropic drugs? As the New American magazine pointed out this week, at least ten high profile mass shootings have been committed by individuals who “were either on — or just recently coming off of — psychiatric medications.”

    Seems like half the country is on psych meds at this point.

    • Agree: Anonym
    • Replies: @jtgw
  2. Right on, Dr. Paul, and with regard to your 2nd/3rd paragraphs: You may know, but others would not believe how many thousands of people in (EACH) agencies like the IRS, FDA, and many others go get gun training at Glynco, Brunswick, Georgia from the Feds and can carry guns around. How many damn onerous laws do we have in modern America to require these people to feel they many need to shoot Americans while being from the government and here to help you?

    Let the Feral Gov’t disarm first – then we can talk about gun control (we can talk, but I won’t change my mind anyway).

  3. How many are dying every day from the CIA/Mossad heroin/meth epidemic, how many every day from Big Pharma opioids?
    How many suicides every day, how many Vet suicides, how many Vets homeless, there are homeless camps popping up in rural Ga. now, we’ve never see anything like this before.
    Yet you won’t hear the media or puppets in congress crying out in outrage over these real issues. No protests.

    America is 100% corrupt, top to bottom, international corporations, banksters, Zionists, Wall St parasites are calling the shots, and they’re profiting from all of these man made epidemics, the “media” works for the same criminal cabal, so not a peep out of them.
    Until something is done about the bribery, blackmail, corruption murder in DC and local govts. don’t expect any change.
    End the Fed scam.

  4. KenH says:

    It’s been nothing but hysteria and Piers Morgan style preening since the shooting. Now Trump has partially cucked and ordered the DOJ to outlaw bump stocks and is considering bumping up the legal age to procure long guns to 21 even though he has no power to do these things.

    The left just wants to use dead kids to disarm the deplorables.

    Cruz belonged in a psychiatric institution. The focus should also be on anti-depressants since some can induce mania as a side effect.

    If anything needs banning it’s cultural Marxism since it’s turned America into an open air insane asylum. The second amendment isn’t the problem.

  5. A few suggestions:

    -spend more money on helping the seriously mentally ill, at the moment people are scared to report mentally ill relatives to the authorities out of fear they will be arrested and imprisoned (the US leads the West in imprisoning psychotics)

    -make gun laws more uniform across states and allow concealed carry in schools and colleges

    -don’t reveal details about the killers for at least six months after their crime.

    Note, other Anglo countries also dish out lots of antidepressants, so its unlikely they are significant cause of gun violence.

  6. The failures here are many fold before attending to outlawing weapons”

    1. parental
    2. school
    3. community
    4. psychiatric
    5. local authorities
    6 the FBI

    But all in all, we are just rarely able to predict who afflicted with what is going to engage in some manner of violent revenge. Murder is a rare occurrence, in fact, given the population, it is an abnormality. In this case there appear to have been some obvious signs that without intervention – violence would result in the immediate. I am not include to put much faith in psychiatric pre-emption. Psychiatry get a lot of data sets incorrect. They are not unknown misdiagnose, over/incorrectly prescribe medications.

    Within the classification of murders mass shootings rarer still. The best solutions to most crimes of this nature is the value vested in developing personal relationships. I find it an odd suggestion given the vapid polity of anti-bullying campaigns, and “trigger settings” that this community (including his academic community) permitted someone as ostracized as this young man was to slip between their sensitive souled fingers.

  7. KenH says:

    So now Trump is considering making pointless changes to gun laws and regulations thanks to a bunch of narcissistic 16-18 year old high school students and their parents who love the sound of their own voices and think their experts on guns and social policy.

  8. Those intent on mass murder don’t obey gun laws.

    No, but those who run businesses selling guns to mass murderers will generally have to follow laws, or else end up paying huge noncompliance fines.

    We cannot stop tragedies like this by banning guns

    This is true up to a point, but banning certain types of gun might lead to a lower number of deaths when these events occur, or more people surviving their injuries.

    It is noticeable that while fans of the Second Amendment are quick to point to psychotropic medicines and the failure of mental health services, they and their allies in the NRA seem to be quite devoid of practical plans to improve child and adolescent mental health services in the US.

    We need to look seriously into the psychotropic drugs that more and more Americans are being prescribed.

    Quite so, Mr. Paul. And what have you, a physician, and your son, who is also a medical man done to improve mental health services in the US? You have been one of the leading physicians in US politics for decades and what exactly have you achieved in this area? What have you been saying about mental health all these decades?

    What about Trump? As a physician, don’t you think the man is crazy and that his latest idea to turn schools into shooting galleries is really jumping the shark?

    Or are you so afraid that someone will take away your pop-gun, that you don’t care how many of other people’s children have to die over this Second Amendment foolishness?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  9. When you analyze it, whenever people start talking about “freedom”, they are nearly always talking about someones freedom to make money with some kind of business. Clearly there are lots and lots of people who make their livings manufacturing, selling, servicing, repairing weapons and other weapon-related activities and commerce, including, perhaps, hotels and restaurants in good venison hunting areas.

    Like selling any kind of product, advertising works by kidding people into deluding themselves that the product has value. The situation with people believing that Second Amendment weaponry is protecting them from the Federal Government has gotten completely out of control.

    The US is not a confederation of tribal chieftaincies each ruled by a warlord, where the reach of the national government is tenuous. Using guns to resist the power of the federal government is quite futile, as Waco and Ruby Ridge showed. Yes, it is true that the government botched this events and caused numerous unnecessary deaths, but clearly the Branch Davidians could never have won their miniature war with the federal government. They actually became guinea pigs for the Second Amendment, and without the Second Amendment most of them would be alive today.

    But what about my freedom to have fresh passion-fruit to make juice? It does not seem to be available in supermarkets in Florida, and yet I am not allowed to bring it or other produce in with me or import it from the Dominican Republic, where it is cheap and plentiful. If I go down to the FDA office with a semi-automatic rifle, will this make the Government more likely to pay attention to my family’s needs? I think not.

    But if there are more restrictions on who can buy high-powered semiautomatic rifles and ammunition, might there not be less deaths in school invasions, might not more people survive, might the injuries of the survivors not be less serious and disabling? I think a harm reduction focus could bring some benefits and it would not really harm anyone other than weapons manufacturers and dealers.

  10. @Jonathan Mason

    … they and their allies in the NRA seem to be quite devoid of practical plans to improve child and adolescent mental health services in the US.

    NRA stands for National Rifle Association. Can you see from that title why they don’t have any plans to improve child and adolescent mental health services? Why don’t you get on some forums where people who deal with that stuff write, and get an answer from them?

    People like you, Jonathan Mason, should never have been let to immigrate from England, no matter how white you may appear. You don’t understand the Constitution, won’t learn a damn thing on unz from people who do, like Dr. Paul, and now you’re in freakin’ Florida, helping to turn a state blue. Nice going, asshole!

    You have to go back!

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
  11. jtgw says:
    @Svigor

    Cruz looks pretty white to me.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  12. @Achmed E. Newman

    NRA stands for National Rifle Association. Can you see from that title why they don’t have any plans to improve child and adolescent mental health services?

    Of course, Achmed! It is because they are just an arm of the arms industry, and have no interest in representing the best interests of everyone.

    This is why we should pay no attention whatsoever to their ideas about how to protect schoolchildren, for example by arming teachers.

    The job of the NRA is to promote ways to sell more guns and kill more people. Once we are straightforward about that, we should discount any suggestions they might make about school safety just as we would if the National Association of Turkeys was making suggestions about having fish for Thanksgiving Dinner.

    PS, I understand the Constitution perfectly well, as I had to pass a test to become a US citizen.

  13. @Jonathan Mason

    PS, I understand the Constitution perfectly well, as I had to pass a test to become a US citizen.

    Nope, I’ve stated before that you must have cheated on that text (like most of the legal immigrants, I know), as you must have not read this part:

    Amendment 2 – Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    (Bolding was not in the original.)

    I am really incensed with people like you, who are possibly intelligent enough to know better, spouting your anti-Constitutional crap to people who have lived here their whole lives. Could you at least get off of Dr. Paul’s page, as he is 5 orders of magnitude more of an American than your imported ass.

    What make it worse is, you’re gonna vote some time. I don’t go to England telling them they should or should not have a King or Queen, or how stupid they’ve been for letting themselves be disarmed! Yeah, maybe I would tell some Englishmen in person how stupid some things are there. They would not allow me to vote on it though.

    Could you please do us a favor and move to Massachusetts, Mr. Mason? There are fewer mosquitoes, and you’d fit in better. Your vote wouldn’t make much difference up there, as they are all a bunch of Commies.

  14. @Jonathan Mason

    Of course, Achmed! It is because they are just an arm of the arms industry, and have no interest in representing the best interests of everyone.

    You’ve been here, what, a coupla’ years? You don’t know much about it, so quit spouting bullshit. The NRA was created over a hundred years ago, and started off protecting free black people’s rights per Amendment II. (Possibly they’d have been better off not bothering, but some people have principles.)

    Of course, they advertise guns and ammo in the magazines, oh and magazines, NOT “clips”. The NRA has been a one-issue organization, and the biggest one protecting this most important civil right of all. Granted, they wussed out in the late 1960′s – no I wasn’t around then, but I have read about this. The GAO, Gun Owners of America is a more hard-core group and deserves our support.

    The job of the NRA is to promote ways to sell more guns and kill more people

    Nope, again, there’s are real lack of understanding on your part. I am slightly on the cynical side, and I even commented under John Derbyshire’s* article on the subject (which you should have read) that big organizations have a main purpose to stay in business. Regarding this, I stated that I have seen them start early on the 2018 election, maybe because, till recently things have probably been slower in terms of membership/donations due to Trump not being a complete Hoplophobe like the Øb☭ma administration and people like you.

    The arms industry is pretty damn small, Mr. Mason. It is one industry that still has most manufacturing in America, so that’s a good thing. It’s just not big enough to have much power at all. The NRA’s 5,000,000 or so members are 99% not involved in the industry besides as customers.

    Jonathan, are you any kin, maybe 12 generations away, from a guy named George, first name King?

    * BTW, there’s an imported Englishment who spends time learning to avoid spouting cntrl-left garbage to people who know better. You should learn something from him.

  15. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State

    Exactly, and who is to regulate the militia well? How can you have a free State when schools in the State are having to talk about arming teachers because the State cannot defend them against militiamen like Nikolas Cruz? What is the use of having these imaginary militias, if they cannot defend the schools from terrorist attacks? Even armed cops who were present were not able to defend the school that was attacked in Florida, or the people who died in the nightclub in Orlando a while back.

    Anyway, the real enemy is not the Second Amendment, which is largely irrelevant, but the NRA, which loses no opportunity to inject extreme right-wing politics into any nuanced discussion of harm reduction and tries, and often succeeds in intimidating legislators and even the weak-minded President of the US into giving credence to its bullshit.

    Dr. Paul is an intelligent independent thinker and has many great ideas that I support, but on this he has got it dead wrong and seems to have forgotten his Hippocratic oath to do no harm. I guess age catches up with us all.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @KenH
  16. @jtgw

    Cruz looks pretty white to me.

    Yeah, but his name ends in Z, so a second look is in order.

    • Replies: @jtgw
  17. @Achmed E. Newman

    You’ve been here, what, a coupla’ years?

    Since 1986, mas o menos, so that would be quite a few years/

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  18. @Achmed E. Newman

    Jonathan, are you any kin, maybe 12 generations away, from a guy named George, first name King?

    George III wasn’t a gun controller at all. His men went after the public armories in two villages in one colony that were already in open rebellion against him, so that action has at least a plausible excuse.

    At home, he was one of the better monarchs they’ve had. Like Hirohito, he seems like a decent guy who got really bad advice in his naive youth, saddling him with unnecessary enemies. I may be somewhat prejudiced on this, having attended a lecture last night by Joseph Pearce on the English Reformation, but the accomplishments of George’s reign aren’t weighted down by a long list of atrocities, as with some other “great” kings. And queens.

    Joe Sobran was asked if Bill Clinton made him miss George Bush, his former target. His answer? Are you kidding? Bill Clinton makes me miss George III.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  19. @Jonathan Mason

    Of course, Achmed! It is because they are just an arm of the arms industry, and have no interest in representing the best interests of everyone.

    Hardly. Read up on the Cincinnati revolt.

    Major gun manufacturers actually supported the Gun Control Act of 1968, no doubt because what they gained in trade protection from the Germans, Austrians, and other competitors outweighed any slowdown in sales. It was the rank-and-file that hated it.

    And that hatred was stoked by the observation that the (grossly misnamed) urban “liberals” who were the strongest advocates of tightening the vise on firearms regulation were also those softest on real criminals.

    Whatever your opinion of our “gun culture”, at least admit its truly grass-roots origins and nature.

    Britons like gun control because it means proles disarming toffs. Americans hate gun control because it means toffs disarming proles.

  20. @Jonathan Mason

    PS, I understand the Constitution perfectly well, as I had to pass a test to become a US citizen.

    I’ve helped a few colleagues study for this so-called test. In no way is understanding the Constitution “perfectly well” a minimum requirement. Or even an encouraged goal.

    The civics questions are at a second- or third-grade level at best. I’d be surprised if the Boy Scouts of America’s requirements for the corresponding merit badges aren’t significantly more demanding.

    In fact, they are:

    Citizenship in the Nation merit badge requirements

    Explain what citizenship in the nation means and what it takes to be a good citizen of this country. Discuss the rights, duties, and obligations of a responsible and active American citizen.
    Do TWO of the following:
    a. Visit a place that is listed as a National Historic Landmark or that is on the National Register of Historic Places. Tell your counselor what you learned about the landmark or site and what you found interesting about it.
    b. Tour your state capitol building or the U.S. Capitol. Tell your counselor what you learned about the capitol, its function, and the history.
    c. Tour a federal facility. Explain to your counselor what you saw there and what you learned about its function in the local community and how it serves this nation.
    d. Choose a national monument that interests you. Using books, brochures, the Internet (with your parent’s permission), and other resources, find out more about the monument. Tell your counselor what you learned, and explain why the monument is important to this country’s citizens.
    Watch the national evening news five days in a row OR read the front page of a major daily newspaper five days in a row. Discuss the national issues you learned about with your counselor. Choose one of the issues and explain how it affects you and your family.
    Discuss each of the following documents with your counselor. Tell your counselor how you feel life in the United States might be different without each one.
    a. Declaration of Independence
    b. Preamble to the Constitution
    c. The Constitution
    d. Bill of Rights
    e. Amendments to the Constitution
    List the six functions of government as noted in the preamble to the Constitution. Discuss with your counselor how these functions affect your family and local community.
    With your counselor’s approval, choose a speech of national historical importance. Find out about the author, and tell your counselor about the person who gave the speech. Explain the importance of the speech at the time it was given, and tell how it applies to American citizens today. Choose a sentence or two from the speech that has significant meaning to you, and tell your counselor why.
    Name the three branches of our federal government and explain to your counselor their functions. Explain how citizens are involved in each branch. For each branch of government, explain the importance of the system of checks and balances.
    Name your two senators and the member of Congress from your congressional district. Write a letter about a national issue and send it to one of these elected officials, sharing your view with him or her. Show your letter and any response you receive to your counselor.

    https://meritbadge.org/wiki/index.php/Citizenship_in_the_Nation

  21. @Jonathan Mason

    You’ve got to be borderline-retard to have been here since 1986, living in the South that whole time(?), and still not understand why people better keep their guns. I don’t believe it.

  22. @Reg Cæsar

    Joe Sobran was asked if Bill Clinton made him miss George Bush, his former target. His answer? Are you kidding? Bill Clinton makes me miss George III.

    Of course, Reg, I’d agree that compared to the US Police State going back to the mid-1970′s*, we’d all be better off under King George.

    It’s just that he was another Englishman, as you said, who didn’t have a fucking clue. Nothing that went on then resembled the atrocities of justice and the Anarcho-tyranny that go on everyday in this place, not to mention actual physical atrocities like Waco and Ruby Ridge.

    .
    .

    * Of course the decade is arguable. I and other Libertarians enjoy arguing about that. It’s the clueless Masons (the ones on unz, I mean) who just are too stupid to make arguing enjoyable – all their damn premises are wrong, and they know no history.

  23. @Jonathan Mason

    That’s NOT what the founders of this country who wrote up the Bill of Rights, meant by “regulated”, and you should know that, I mean, after your BIG TEST and all back in the ’80′s.

    “Well regulated” meant well-practiced, i.e. trained-up to shoot well.

    If you were well “well read”, you might have known this before now, Mr. Mason. I’m well-read, but could still use to get better regulated.

  24. KenH says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    You think like a leftist. “Well regulated” in the context of the second amendment does not connote government control by Diane Fienstein, Chuck U Schumer, the ADL or some federal institution like Congress. It essentially means that not only should the sovereign states have a militia but that it be well organized and trained.

    Militias served as protection for the individual sovereign states and, if necessary, against the federal government who had no standing army at the time because it was not supposed to have a monopoly of force over the states like it has today. Eisenhower and JFK federalized national guards to force racial integration upon hapless whites at gunpoint and for all intents and purposes they are just another tool which the federal government uses to project raw power throughout the country when needed.

    Militia meant mean any adult citizen capable of bearing arms and was not, as presumably you and the left ignorantly or deceitfully claim, just a precursor to the national guard and police forces which now somehow nullifies an individual’s right to bear arms.

  25. “Well regulated” meant well-practiced, i.e. trained-up to shoot well.

    Regulated means “ruled” and comes from the same latin root as the word king (rex). There is not really any evidence that it used to mean anything other than “well-ordered”.

    In any case, the Bill of Rights was something concocted by a committee and the members may not even have exactly agreed on the meaning of each word, but the British colonials who composed it just thought it sounded like something that ought to be in a Constitution.

    However, I don’t think it is all that important what the Founders thought they were saying, because that was then, and now is now, and no one really believes that the Founders intended to allow lunatics to easily obtain rapid firing weapons to kill and maim school children. At least no one except the NRA.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  26. jtgw says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Svigor was claiming that violence was just a black or brown problem. Cruz is white, his last name notwithstanding.

    • Replies: @KenH
  27. Cruz is white, his last name notwithstanding

    Could be a Sno Ball, pumpkin bar, or egg.

  28. @Jonathan Mason

    Per Peak Stupidity’s “Dealing with tragic reality and the women’s vote” your statements here out you as a woman. If I had known you were a lady, albeit with a man’s name, I’d have not spent as much of my time fruitlessly arguing with an emotional non-thinker. Thanks a lot for the hour I’ll never get back, Miss Mason.

  29. KenH says:
    @jtgw

    Cruz has a Jewish mother and Jews don’t consider themselves white (i.e., European) and according to Jewish religious law having a Jewish mother makes one a Jew. You only want to make him white because he did something bad but if he helped rescue kids from a shooter then the media would be playing up the fact that he has a Jewish mother and Jews would be claiming him as one of their own.

    When Jews do something good they are identified as Jews but when they do bad or commit evil acts then suddenly they are cast as evil white men.

    When blacks commit around 55% of all murders nationally while whites are underrepresented in all violent crime categories then violence is primarily a black and brown problem. When the “stop and frisk” debate in NYC was raging a few years ago it was revealed that black and brown commit an astounding 90% of all murders. Same story in Chicago as I recall.

    If I had to hazard a guess I’ll bet you live near very few, if any, blacks and browns because you know who poses the most violent crime threat, but it feels good to lie to yourself. If you think that most blacks and Latinos have an inner Ron Paul that they can channel you will be sorely disappointed.

    • Replies: @jtgw
  30. jtgw says:
    @KenH

    I don’t know what to believe about Cruz’ race: you or my own two lying eyes.

  31. Svigor says:

    Cruz looks pretty white to me.

    A lot of Jews can pass for white. That said, anecdotes != statistics, and anecdotes != national problems. So your comment is irrelevant at best.

  32. Svigor says:

    Svigor was claiming that violence was just a black or brown problem. Cruz is white, his last name notwithstanding.

    Bullshit, that’s your straw man.

    My comment:

    While we’re at it, let’s look beyond the left’s delusional narrative of human cognitive equality, too: America doesn’t have a gun violence problem, America has a black and brown violence problem.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ron Paul Comments via RSS