By David Codrea
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “A Manville NJ High School senior says that he was ordered to go for a psychological exam after an anti-gun control project he was assigned last year was found on his thumb drive at school,” News 12 New Jersey reports.
“[Frank] Harvey was assigned the project during his junior year for a college career readiness class. He was tasked with putting together a video arguing against gun control laws.”
The teacher doesn’t dispute that – she just tells the family she doesn’t remember giving that assignment. Harvey says he remembers getting an “A.”
That should be easy enough to check on, assuming records are kept. They are, aren't they?
But say Harvey can’t prove his “innocence”—since when is supporting a Constitutionally-enumerated right cause for questioning mental health?
And why would someone finding a thumb drive not stop at identifying its owner? And just what kind of hysterical “progressive” administrator would then turn around and sic the cops on the kid?
It’s curious—when Ahmed the clock boy brought his device to school, “progressives” all the way up to the president tripped all over themselves condemning the teacher, administrators and police for following official DHS “If you see something say something” protocols. But no devices were found on Harvey – just a video making the case for armed self-defense and presenting political cartoons pointing out the dangerous absurdity of “gun free zones.”
The anti-defense zealots are not just against guns, they’re against the idea of guns. And in true Soviet fashion, any who challenge official doctrine become candidates for the gulag under the pretense of “mental health.”
What’s unknown, since Harvey withdrew from Manville rather than subject himself to offensive mandated indignities, is what effect that will have should he later in life wish to actually purchase a gun. Especially if he stays in New Jersey.
This whole sorry episode highlights why gun owners need to be on vigilant guard against eroding the right to keep and bear arms via so-called “mental health” prohibitions – even those proposed by presumed “friendlies.”
What protections will exist to offset politically-connected anti-gun judges, politically-appointed boards, and “expert” adherents of the American Psychiatric Association’s “Position Statement on Firearm Access, Acts of Violence and the Relationship to Mental Illness and Mental Health Services.” It’s fair to ask, because APA includes in its advocacy platform registration-enabling, background checks, “smart” guns, storage requirements, “gun-free” zones, doctor-patient boundary violations, tax-funded anti-gun “studies,” all outside the scope of the training and credentialing of those making these proposals.
Also of interest – or it should be – how will rights be restored when there is no longer a compelling mental health prescription to deny them? What universal appeal mechanism – affordable to all, not just to elites for whom money is no object – will exist to declare a person is once more “eligible” to keep and bear arms? What guarantees are there that the same biases that colored the disability ruling in the first place won’t reassert themselves in the “parole” process? And have we identified psychiatric evaluators, risk management administrators and insurers who will be willing to subject themselves to malpractice liabilities should a person deemed “fit” be misdiagnosed? Or will the pressure be to “err on the side of caution”?
What due process protections equivalent to a jury trial will exist before going after a fundamental right?
There are those in the gun ban camp – no coincidence the crazier ones – who advocate that just wanting a gun is a sign of mental illness. Underlying that, we are portrayed as racist (naturally), impulsive, paranoid, angry, and suffering from “a crisis of confidence.”
There’s a reason why they call us “gun nuts.”
UPDATE: NJ.com has posted the video that got the school bent out of shape at Harvey over. Watch it yourself and you'll see there is absolutely nothing threatening about it, and anyone who believes there is needs that psych evaluation they wanted the kid to submit to.
It also says “an official” from Child Services was sent to the family home.
There's a lot of “he said/she said” going on, but the bottom line is, if the video on the thumb drive was the cause for school actions, that's appalling. Regardless if this is a case of school hysteria or a subjective presentation of events, the public has a right to know what really happened.
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.
In addition to being a field editor/columnist at GUNS Magazine and associate editor for Oath Keepers, he blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.