The Milgram Experiment

     A series of psychology experiments were performed by Stanley Milgram.  The goal of the study is to measure the willingness of the participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts that conflicted with their personal conscience. 
     The study has three key participants.    A scientist/”authority,” a “coach,” and a “learner”/student.  Unbeknownst to the “coach” he is actually the one being studied.  However the “coach” is told that the test is about observing the coach training the learner who is supposed to remember a group of facts.  The scientist authority figure is to “observe” the technique and keep the study on track. 
     The real kicker comes when the “coach” is asked to deliver a shock to the the “learner.”  There is a bank of switches which deliver a shock to the “learner” if he gets a wrong answer.  With each wrong answer the “coach” delivers a shock to the “learner.”  The switch bank increments from 45 volts up to 450 volts.  With each missed question the next higher level of pain is induced.  The switches are marked low danger, medium danger, high danger, life threatening, death. 
     The “coach” continues to ratchet up to the next level at the direction of the scientist/authority figure.  Of course the study is rigged so that the coach continues to deliver ever increasing shocks no matter how much pain is caused.  Eventually the “learner”/actor cries out in pain and then eventually is non-responsive.  However the scientist/authority figure continues direct the “coach” to increase the intensity level of the jolts to the maximum 450 volts. 
     “Coaches” from all walks of life were tested, 65% went all the way to 450 volts even though their conscience was bothering them.  These were just “nice” obedient run of the mill folks. 
I would encourage everyone to view the youtube.com videos here below.  There are two studies on video the original Milgram study and another one below in three parts.

Original film from Milgram  (http://tinyurl.com/original-milgram)

“Many people not knowing that much about the experiment claim that people who go to the end of the board are sadistic.  Nothing could be more foolish as an overall characterization of these persons.  The context of their actions must always be considered.  The individual upon entering the laboratory must be integrated into a situation that carries its own momentum.  The results, as I observed them in the laboratory, are disturbing.  They raise the possibility that human nature cannot be counted on to insulate men from brutality and inhumane treatment at the direction of malevolent authority.  A substantial proportion of people do what they are told to do irrespective of the content of the act without limitations of conscience so long as they perceive that the command comes from a legitimate authority.  If in this study an anonymous experimenter could successfully command adult to subdue a 50 year old man and force on him painful electric shocks against his protests, one can only wonder what government with its vastly greater authority and prestige can command of its subjects.” Stanley Milgram comments.

A newer version is available here in 3 parts:
Part 1 of 3  
Part 2 of 3 
Part 3 of 3 
     The conclusion is clear that the “average” person will continue to follow the direction of who, or what they perceive to be an authority figure, even if in their own mind it might or could be causing serious injury or even death.  We in America have been trained from the time we are very small to OBEY authority figures at home and all through school.  We have, to the tune of 65%, become obedient slaves.  Even escaped slaves from the Old South felt guilty for having “stolen” themselves from their masters. 
At what point will you consider resisting or defying authority when you perceive the authority is wrong.  Remember, “it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong (Voltaire).”
     Feel free to leave comments.

     This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike license.

Herd Mentality

Dan A. Mefford, D.C.

We have all read about the classic “herd mentality” exhibited by the buffalo on the plains. The Indians would surround the herd and stampede them over a cliff. Raising sheep and hogs I have observed the same phenomenon.

It is also a well documented response in people. There is just something way down deep in our souls that just has a hard time breaking loose from the herd and going our own independent way. When the herd begins to move, there is that tendency to ‘assume’ that someone up ahead must know “the way” that we need to go, after all, everyone is going “that way.”

Thinking, speaking, and acting on your own against the herd is hard, like swimming upstream. It leads to criticism, from friends and family however finally when major needed improvements come about the herd gradually starts turning ‘that way” but, not until some independent thinker begins to turn first.

My question, how long will it take officials to see that their loyalty cannot be to “the law” but to a Constitution which they are sworn to uphold against all  enemies foreign and domestic. The laws frequently are without constitutional merit. They are overturned all the time.

Many candidates have stated they will swear an oath to uphold the “laws” of the state of Illinois and to the constitution. I would recommend that the candidates review the oath and think about this.

Article 13, Section 3. “I do solemnly swear (affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of . . . to the best of my ability.”

Years ago it was not uncommon in some states to have blacks sit at the back of the bus, drink from their own fountain, use their own restroom. Those were laws. They were laws that caused pain for many years against people who could not afford fancy pants lawyers.

Will our newest crop of candidates for important legal positions in Illinois uphold and prosecute a law like that until the Supreme Court says “that is unconstitutional?” Or, will they have the courage to break from the herd and say for instance, “The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” on my watch!

Contact me: pike912.blogspot.com.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike license.

Ted Nugent on the Illinois FOID Card

Ted Nugent

Ted Nugent was the key note speaker at the recent, Feb. 10, 2012, Republican dinner at the Springfield Prairie Capitol Convention Center.  He had some "interesting" remarks on the FOID card (Firearm Owners ID).  Needless to say they weren't too flattering.  WMAY 970AM talk radio did the video recording.

Here is the short version edited by me. You gotta listen to this one at least referencing the FOID Card.... about 5 minutes…

http://youtu.be/hQOdarm_g7c

Here is the full length speech if you have time... about 40 minutes…

http://youtu.be/wUwtpOhBRAk


Enjoy!

Illiniois State Police Self Defense Recommendations to Women

 Dan A. Mefford, D.C.

NOTE:  The ISP pages referenced below have been deactivated since this post was made... 2012-03-12

I was really interested in what the Illinois State Police (ISP) recommends to women in the process of being assaulted.  Now before I go too far, I did a little unofficial research, with some of my friends who are state police actually “on the road” so to speak.  What I discovered from the cop in the trench and from the Official ISP website were not the same opinions.  But I have to go with the “Official” version for this article.

A little research at http://tinyurl.com/ispwomen reveals the head of the ISP, Hiram Grau and Gov. Quinn recommend that a lady under assault (My comments are in parentheses):

• Reason with their attacker (really?)
• Tell attacker that you have AIDS or VD
• Make yourself throw up (I am serious!)
• Use your imagination
  (I am NOT making this up, please verify)

If you must fight they say:

• Guns stolen from residences is a primary way criminals get weapons
  (I am not sure what this statement has to do with anything)

•  Beware of times and places where attacks are most likely to occur

-Parking lots

-Walking at night

-Waiting for a bus

 -Elevators

            -Others you will learn to recognize (After a few assaults, I suppose.  Honest women should not go to parking lots, for night walks, etc. they are “asking for it.”  Just criminals are allowed in these areas.)

Useful defense weapons are:

• nail file
• rat tail comb
• teasing brush
• pens and pencils
• keys
• anything rigid

[When fighting] Concentrate on these areas only when combating an assailant:

• groin
• eyes
• ears
• nose 
• throat

Do Director Grau and Gov Quinn actually tell their wives and daughters this stuff? 

In forty nine other states essentially you are able to respond with, bang, bang, bang, bang, and bang.

I recommend women by the carload go to Illinois Gun Owners Lobby Day in Springfield at the Prairie Capitol Convention Center by noon on March 7 to express their outrage to the Chicago Machine legislators about this travesty.

If you would like to correspond with me on this contact me at: editorial@pike912.org or leave a message at 217-285-2134, or follow my blog at: pike912.blogspot.com.

The Government Hogs are Rooting at the Fence

Dan A. Mefford, D.C.

When I was on the farm we had quite a few hogs.  We found that a substantial amount of time had to be spent fixin' the fence to keep the hogs in.  If an ole sow rooted too much in one area we usually wired a hedge post in that spot so that she could not effectively work on the fence itself.  ‘Cuz’ once she got her nose under she would work and root and dig and stretch until she could get out.

Now government has a lot of parallels to the hogs.  Our Founders made it clear that the government was a lot like those hogs.  It would advance and root and dig and stretch until it ruled every facet of our lives.  The founders made it clear that government needs the “chains” of the Constitution to bind it down to prevent it from becoming tyrannical.  It is the nature of Government that it loves to hog power and hog our Liberty and it does it all under the name of necessity and it is for the “good of the People” or for the “children” or to maintain a “civilized” society or to defend the People against certain enemies, or maintain the public safety or health. 

These are all fine sounding things that have a measure of relevance.  However it does this by exerting control over the daily aspects of our lives.  It does this by removing choice and by making our decisions for us.  Such as whether we can consume certain things that it deems aren’t good for the People.  Or that the People and private business must use a safety harness (OSHA) for certain tasks, however government entities are exempt.  At what point does rooting and hogging of power need to stop and the number one function of government, the preservation of fundamental rights to, Life, Liberty and Property, need to be enforced? 

It is not up to the Government to fix the fence.  Remember the ole sow she isn’t interested in a good fence she is interested only in what she wants.  Government will NEVER restrain itself.  It is up to the People to restrain government by fixing the fence and reminding it that its number one responsibility is to preserve fundamental liberties and rights.  Government has no interest in preserving fundamental rights because that restrains its power.  It is not about to fence itself in!

I believe one of the Founders stated that the price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.  The vigilance must be exerted by the People to contain and restrain government.

If you would like to correspond with me on this contact me at:  editorial@pike912.org or leave a message at 217-285-2134, or follow my blog at: pike912.blogspot.com.

The Federal Government could use a few lessons from the Chicago Machine….

The federal government needs to take a seminar from the Chicago Machine.  They are after all, the ones who designed, authored, and conceived of the diabolical Article 1, Section 22, of the Illinois Constitution which states, “Subject only to the police power the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” 

A classic attorney trick in the court room is to ask a series of several questions that are obviously answered with “yes” then throw in a question that requires a “no.”  The witness then is droning along answering yes, yes, yes and is then tricked into answering yes to a no question.  Then the attorney will pounce on the witness’ mistake and try to impugn his character, or memory, or to cast doubt on his credibility and integrity.

In Illinois the authors of the state Constitution placed the RKBA section at number 22 unlike the founders who placed it 2^nd.  At that point the general public got sucker punched ‘cuz’ they just didn’t read it that far.  If they did, by then they were just hurrying through like the guy sitting on the witness stand answering yes, yes, yes.  I mean this is the Bill of Rights, not even the Chicago Machine would screw with that, would they?  

At this point the Obamunists are determined that any church organizations such as hospitals and colleges and schools will have to include abortifacients (life terminating drugs), contraceptives, sterilization services, among other things that directly oppose the moral and religious convictions of many Catholics and protestants.  If the Obamunists would get together with the Chicago Machine they surely could have got this through in a lot more subtle manner.  After all, as far as I know, until I started fussing about the term “Subject only to the police power” nobody seemed think it was any big deal.   The Feds need to import some of our Chicago Rulers who are artists at sugar coating the poison pills.

Now, it is amazing how the Feds have managed do some pretty good tricks of their own.  I am still trying to figure out what slight of hand the Obamunists are going to use to force the People to buy health insurance.  Can you force the People to sign and enter into a contract?  Any contract signed under duress or threat is null and void on its face.  I forgot the government seems to think it can make its own rules and then change them in the middle of the game. 

I guess one smart thing that the Obamunists did is to give everyone a year to “figure out how to violate our consciences,” said Archbishop Timothy Dolan.  I suppose giving everyone time to contemplate just what the consequences are to violating federal law might encourage one to go along with the program.  Well we will see.  Although the more I think about the eternal consequences to violating God’s law. . . that might outweigh even the Obamunists and their Obamunistic plans. 

I suppose if judges can turn “shall not be infringed” into meaning “shall not be infringed very much,” they could surely turn, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of thereof” into, “For the most part Congress shall make no law . . .”  Yeah that ought to handle it.  After all, no right is absolute.  What seems to be absolute is that the “compelling interest” of the state shall not be infringed, at all!  Thou shalt not infringe the compelling interest of the state, no matter how many fundamental rights have to be infringed. 

I guess that pretty well takes care of abridging freedom of speech and the press and peaceable assembly and petitioning the government for redress of grievances.  Shoot, while we’re at it we can certainly moderate the other rights as well; I mean after all the whole purpose of government is in the interest of maintaining public safety!  Or, is it?

I think the out-of-date and antiquated document called the Declaration of Independence in part reads this way: “we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights among those are the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men.   Ooops, it looks like the whole reason for government is to secure Rights endowed by our Creator, not for the primary purpose of maintaining public safety.  Don’t worry; the Chicago Machine can teach the Feds how to get around it.  I got faith!

If you would like to correspond with me on this contact me at:  editorial@pike912.org or leave a message at 217-285-2134, or follow my blog at: pike912.blogspot.com.

Poitical humor in one liners . . .

 Life is too short not to have a little humor.  Enjoy. DrD

• Why pay money to have your family tree traced; go into politics and your opponents will do it for you. ~Author Unknown 

• If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. ~Jay Leno 

• Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. ~John Quinton 

• Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich, by promising to protect each from the other. ~Oscar Ameringer 

• I offer my opponents a bargain: if they will stop telling lies about us, I will stop telling the truth about them. ~Adlai Stevenson, campaign speech, 1952 

• A politician is a fellow who will lay down your life for his country. ~Texas Guinan 

• Any American who is prepared to run for president should automatically, by definition, be disqualified from ever doing so. ~Gore Vidal 

• I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians. ~Charles de Gaulle 

• Instead of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks. ~Doug Larson 

• Don't vote, it only encourages them. ~Author Unknown 

• There ought to be one day - just one - when there is open season on senators. ~Will Roger

Revoluton or Reformation

Here is a great post by Enola Gay.  I think she really has some great thoughts this topic.  However our Founders said from time to time the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of both tyrants and patriots.

Samuel Adams said, "It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
Samuel Adams

So I agree in part that the reformation or revolution, if you will, began in the minds of men first:  
     "What do we mean by the Revolution? The war? That was no part of the revolution; it was only an effect and consequence of it. The revolution was in the minds of the people, and this was effected from 1760–1775, in the course of fifteen years, before a drop of blood was shed at Lexington." (John Adams)

"No oppression was ever overthrown by a bunch of readers  and philosophers. Liberty is usually dirty and bloody work, and if we don't have the option of providing our masters with a real  fight, then they will perennially call our wussy  bluff." Quote from Boston T. Party's Boston's Reply to Critics of "Molon Labe"
http://www.freecolorado.com/2004/02/bostonreply.html 
Paratus Familia Blog: Revolution or Reformation?

Second Amendment Clarity

I was just thinking of the confusion that arises in the minds of our Law Enforcement folks.  What a dilemma?  On one hand the State of Illinois is telling them that Subject only to the power of the legislature the Illinois citizen has the right to keep and bear arms (RKBA).  “We the legislature make the rules and the citizens are to follow our laws.”  “The police are to enforce our rules!”  On the other hand some chiropractor and a host of petitioners from Podunksfield, way south of Chicago where the important Rulers live, is telling them that the RKBA is a fundamental right that shall not be infringed by any government agent, local, state, or Federal.

Now that is a fair question.  It deserves a reasonable answer!  So let’s see what we can come up with… 

The officer is just trying to do his job, which can be really risky, then go home to his family and try to be a good dad or mom that their kids and family can look up to.  Now the State in all its wisdom comes along and says you must ENFORCE our edicts.  You are to leave the thinking part to the elected officials and/or bureaucrats and judges who are to determine how you think.  The honchos say, “you will enforce the FOID act and Unlawful Use of Weapons Act because it’s the law.  As an officer of the law your job is to follow orders.”  

Each officer is charged to uphold and defend the Constitutions of Illinois (IC) and the US.  Therefore you have to read the US Constitution (USC) and Bill of Rights or the IC and its Article 1 Bill of Rights.

Then you have this chiropractor, with no law degree, trying to say that he and all mankind have a fundamental, God given right to keep and bear arms and that the FOID card and all laws disarming the law abiding public are void.  So it is a fair question.

The Second Amendment (2A) to USC states, “…the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”  The Illinois Bill of Rights states, “Subject only to the police power (power of the legislature), the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  Here is our first conundrum.  The 2A has no enforceable preface, while the Illinois Constitution states, “Subject only to the [legislative power]. . .  So which one has authority when there is a clash?

We better have good authority or we will be in trouble.  The answer is found in the Sixth Article of the USC, paragraph 2, wherein it states:

“This Constitution . . . under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

So it would appear that any laws made contrary to the Constitution of the United States are void.  At least that is the way it reads to me.  Since the Illinois Constitution is more restrictive, then it should be safe to say that the USC will prevail.  Further see McDonald vs. Chicago and you will see that the US Supreme Court agrees that 2A applies against the states.

Let’s pretend for moment that a judge has written an order of protection on behalf of some threatened soul.  Now in this order it states, “The property of Joe Schmoe shall not be infringed by Iam Sly, widget maker.”  Now that is simple enough.  Even for a chiropractor with no law degree.  The order states, “shall not be infringed.”  Now you, as Law Enforcement Officer, need to enforce this order. 

Now how far is Iam Sly allowed to step or encroach onto Joe Schmoe’s property?  Is it one inch or four feet?  Or perhaps he can go up to the door?  Or maybe one step into the house?  What constitutes an infringement?

Infringement – A breaking into; a trespass or encroachment upon; a violation of a. . . right.  See also Encroachment; Trespass. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6^th Edition)

So if you are to enforce this order, how far onto Joe’s property is Iam Sly allowed to go?  You are a sworn police officer, with training, and the respect of your friends and family and the general public.  You passed certain criteria in the course of your training.  You must have exhibited some measure of common sense.  However I, a legal amateur, would say he is not to even touch the property line.  Isn't this order written so that Iam Sly, a widget maker, can understand it as well?

That brings us to the FOID card, and all these unconstitutional laws that the Chicago Rulers have foisted on the People.  What are you, the Law Enforcement Officer, going to do when it comes to enforcing what is an obviously unconstitutional law?  Will you say, “My commander said to enforce it no matter what?”  My boss said, “You will follow the law of our Chicago Rulers no matter what.” 

Remember, our founding documents were written to be understood by the common person with common understanding.  How much more clear can it get?  Will you the Law Enforcement Officer tell your children, or the guy in the mirror, “I was just following orders?”

It states, "Shall not be infringed."  How is that for clarity?
 

If you would like to correspond with me on this contact me at:  editorial@pike912.org or leave a message at 217-285-2134, or follow my blog at: pike912.blogspot.com.

Why do out-of-staters have more rights in Illinois?

It has recently come to my attention that a nice little town in Montana, a lot like Pittsfield, IL., where I live, has had a beloved school teacher abducted and presumed murdered.  The story is that a few days ago a teacher in Sydney, MT, may have been abducted or any number of things along the road she usually ran for exercise.


In Montana you have the right to carry for any lawful reason.

While your are at it you may want to view this Youtube video of a cop who encourages carrying a defensive firearm on a regular basis... WARNING, this is a very audibly disturbing video with an elderly defenseless lady on a 911 call.  She is being brutally beaten to death.  You will not want children present as this is viewed due to the audible component.

Somehow we need to become aware that in Illinois only out-of-state people are allowed to carry a gun with no FOID card.  Illinois residents are not allowed to carry or own guns without a FOID card.

I would like to know what makes out-of-staters such trustworthy folks but Illinois residents are so horrible?  Ask every legislator this question, ask every judge, every official that you meet why Illinois citizens are so suspect that they must ask permission of the state to own or carry a firearm?

Further, only out-of-staters are allowed to buy ammo with just a drivers license showing they are from out-of-state.  Same question... It is time to get in YOUR FACE with these people...

If you would like to correspond with me on this contact me at:  editorial@pike912.org or leave a message at 217-285-2134, or follow my blog at: pike912.blogspot.com.