69 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
Nearly Every Mass Shooting In The Last 20 Years Shares One Thing In Common, And It Isn't Weapons
"The overwhelming evidence points to the signal largest common factor in all of these incidents is the fact that all of the perpetrators were either actively taking powerful psychotropic drugs or had been at some point in the immediate past before they committed their crimes."
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    I think the biggest issue is copycats and the notoriety they get. Why was it that postal workers went "postal" for a while, then stopped? I think it's the same thing with school shootings, monkey see, monkey do. And those with emotional problems may be more apt to copy others?

    I wonder what would happen if the media refused to publish these stories? Of course, they have the First Ammendment in the US that allows them to do so, but that doesn't mean they HAVE to publish anything they don't want to.

    But it's hard to assume it's the treatment causing these people to do what they do. It's possible without treatments these incidents would be even more common. This is something that is probably next to impossible to accurately research.
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9160941].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

      But it's hard to assume it's the treatment causing these people to do what they do. It's possible without treatments these incidents would be even more common. This is something that is probably next to impossible to accurately research.
      I can only speak for myself and many veterans I know that have been subjected to the VA's first line of treatment, but those of us that have stopped taking the prescribed medications did so for one overriding reason. That is the abject fear that we subjected our friends and family to by instantly going to a state of homicidal rage at the slightest provocation.

      I once chased my sister through the house armed with a butcher knife. Had I caught her before she was able to lock herself away, there is no doubt that I would have hacked her to death and probably feasted on her flesh.

      I am probably the gentlest person you would ever hope to meet.

      I would rather live with the vagaries of being profoundly disabled with PTSD than ever take another psychotropic medication again in my life. These drugs are incredibly, immeasurably and insidiously dangerous to those taking them and every single person that they come into contact with.

      Trust me, on this.

      Cheers. - Frank
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162580].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
        Banned
        Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

        These drugs are incredibly, immeasurably and insidiously dangerous to those taking them and every single person that they come into contact with
        You can really only speak to your own experience. They actually help many people with mental illnesses. I've seen the results in some friends, as well as taken Prozac myself with the only "side effect" of the drug being that I, inexplicably, felt happy for no apparent reason. One or two anecdotal stories do not a study make.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162702].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
          Banned
          Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

          You can really only speak to your own experience. They actually help many people with mental illnesses. I've seen the results in some friends, as well as taken Prozac myself with the only "side effect" of the drug being that I, inexplicably, felt happy for no apparent reason. One or two anecdotal stories do not a study make.

          As I stated:

          I can only speak for myself and many veterans I know that have been subjected to the VA's first line of treatment,
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162705].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author HeySal
        Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

        I can only speak for myself and many veterans I know that have been subjected to the VA's first line of treatment, but those of us that have stopped taking the prescribed medications did so for one overriding reason. That is the abject fear that we subjected our friends and family to by instantly going to a state of homicidal rage at the slightest provocation.

        I once chased my sister through the house armed with a butcher knife. Had I caught her before she was able to lock herself away, there is no doubt that I would have hacked her to death and probably feasted on her flesh.

        I am probably the gentlest person you would ever hope to meet.

        I would rather live with the vagaries of being profoundly disabled with PTSD than ever take another psychotropic medication again in my life. These drugs are incredibly, immeasurably and insidiously dangerous to those taking them and every single person that they come into contact with.

        Trust me, on this.

        Cheers. - Frank
        Many in the psychiatric field are coming clean about these drugs now. They are useless at best, and many of the mental conditions are made up. The guy that first coined the term ADHD admitted in his last interview before he died that he made it up for money. I saw some documentaries from Ted or somewhere such that showed how the psychiatric field made up a lot of things that would allow them the same status as medical doctors. So far, there is no biological evidence for a lot of the "disorders" they call "diseases" or disorders.

        When a drug lists side effects of homicidal and suicidal tendencies as side effect warnings right on the bottles you'd think people would "get" it, but they don't. They will swallow anything they are told to. Schools give these drugs because they get subsidized for each kid they drug. If that doesn't outrage people, I'm not sure what will. We are drugging an alarming amount of people. I don't even want to live by anyone who is taking psychotropic drugs. I had a roomie on them and insisted she needed them, but she was lucid when off them - even smiled and laughed. Then she'd take her meds, drool (literally) in front of the TV, and talk about killing herself. Yeah, some help, huh? We, as a society get lucky when these drugged out zombies kill themselves instead of someone else.

        There are a lot of court cases going on now over these drugs. I'm trying to find those documentaries again. They will completely fry you.
        Signature

        Sal
        When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
        Beyond the Path

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162707].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
          Banned
          Additionally, Prozac is the 'baby aspirin' of psychotropic medications. It should probably be added to the water supply like flouride. Cheers. - Frank
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162721].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
            Banned
            Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

            Additionally, Prozac is the 'baby aspirin' of psychotropic medications. It should probably be added to the water supply like flouride. Cheers. - Frank

            Well, it was listed in the OP's story as one of those that turns people into ravenous, flesh eating monsters that plunder, kill and maime victims for fun.

            I also had a schizophrenic friend whose life was one of confinement, both in jail and mental institutions until they got the right balance of medications. She now has visitation rights with her daughter and holds down a steady job. She's literally a different person. There are thousands of people who are helped by these medications. There are undoubtedly some that they work on.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162738].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
              Banned
              Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

              There are thousands of people who are helped by these medications. There are undoubtedly some that they work on.
              No doubt about that. It's just that the proclivity for someone to go ballistic after years of seemingly being helped is a major issue, well documented in and outside of the VA. Ask any vet with PTSD what his single largest regret is in his treatment protocol and a majority of them will tell you that it would be starting on a regimen of these drugs. Many will be in tears when they do so. The horror stories are very sad. Honestly, at my VA PTSD clinic, I can't confess to knowing any of my fellow vets who regard these medications as a plus in their lives.

              Again, I can only speak about my personal experiences and those shared by vets that I have been in treatment with every single week for decades. Those of us that are still alive, that is.

              Cheers. - Frank
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162802].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
            Banned
            Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

            Additionally, Prozac is the 'baby aspirin' of psychotropic medications. It should probably be added to the water supply like flouride. Cheers. - Frank
            I have a schizophrenic friend who lived much of her life confined, both in jail and mental institutions. She lost everything. Her marriage, her daughter, every job she ever attempted. Once they got the meds right for her, her life has done a complete turnaround. She has visitation with her daughter, a steady job and she doesn't get locked up in the middle of the night because she's out doing bizarre things. Thousands of people are helped by some of these medications. Obviously, there will always be some people who cannot be helped with them.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162753].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
              Banned
              Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

              Once they got the meds right for her, her life has done a complete turnaround.
              Maybe they just got her diet right. Or her thyroid levels moderated. Or her blood chemistry. Or that she just decided to get off the pity pot.

              We'll never know, but don't rush to believe that it was the miracle of modern pharmacology.

              Cheers. - Frank

              P.S. I hate to sound harsh with the 'pity pot' comment, but if you had been in as many group PTSD sessions as I have . . . . . . . . you'd know what I mean.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162817].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                Banned
                Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                Maybe they just got her diet right. Or her thyroid levels moderated. Or her blood chemistry. Or that she just decided to get off the pity pot.

                We'll never know, but don't rush to believe that it was the miracle of modern pharmacology.

                Cheers. - Frank

                P.S. I hate to sound harsh with the 'pity pot' comment, but if you had been in as many group PTSD sessions as I have . . . . . . . . you'd know what I mean.
                Well that's pretty ridiculous statement especially coming from someone who suffers from PTSD. I was a witness to numerous of her psychotic breaks with reality. I also saw her being arrested for doing bizarre things ... arrested to mostly protect her until they could get her to the mental institution. I can assure you that it wasn't her diet and that changing her diet was not even considered. She was also not suffering from a thyroid condition of any sort but you did get one of them right. Blood chemistry. When the right chemistry was introduced into her blood stream, she became a fully functioning mother, worker, and friend.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162935].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                  Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                  Well that's pretty ridiculous statement especially coming from someone who suffers from PTSD. I was a witness to numerous of her psychotic breaks with reality. I also saw her being arrested for doing bizarre things ... arrested to mostly protect her until they could get her to the mental institution. I can assure you that it wasn't her diet and that changing her diet was not even considered. She was also not suffering from a thyroid condition of any sort but you did get one of them right. Blood chemistry. When the right chemistry was introduced into her blood stream, she became a fully functioning mother, worker, and friend.
                  There are cases where there is a SEVERE chemical imbalance. In such a case, it is often relatively easy to make them APPEAR normal. Apparently it is FAR harder to get things just so. If they aren't just so, the person could be almost zombie like and/or suicidal, etc...

                  They really do need to find a way to more precisely regulate things, check it, and hopefully FIX the problem. A lot of these drugs say "It is THOUGHT TO", or "The THEORY IS", or "We THINK THAT", or "It APPEARS to". And obviously they have no way they generally use to directly check it. And do they EVER FIX the problem? By FIX, I mean so the BODY regulates it properly.

                  Steve
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162989].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                  Well that's pretty ridiculous statement especially coming from someone who suffers from PTSD. I was a witness to numerous of her psychotic breaks with reality. I also saw her being arrested for doing bizarre things ... arrested to mostly protect her until they could get her to the mental institution. I can assure you that it wasn't her diet and that changing her diet was not even considered. She was also not suffering from a thyroid condition of any sort but you did get one of them right. Blood chemistry. When the right chemistry was introduced into her blood stream, she became a fully functioning mother, worker, and friend.
                  All I can say about that, is this. Last week, my 60 year-old sister was released from a psychiatric hospital. How did she wind-up, there? She was displaying what the doctors deemed as disturbing 'psychotic' behavior and they recommended that she be hospitalized in order to initiate a treatment regimen that was based on finding the proper 'cocktail' of psychotropic medications that would allow her to live a more comfortable life. After poisoning her with one drug after another which only seemed to work for a few days before having her condition worsen, it took a female psychiatrist to order a full work-up including a comprehensive blood test.

                  It wound up that she had a barely functioning thyroid and after 5 days of being treated for that, her 'sanity' returned and she is now home, resting comfortably, without a trace of the wrong medications in her system. Suzanne, there is absolutely nothing 'ridiculous' about highlighting the fact that bizarre behavior can be the result of of one or more myriad causes. Our doctors have been taught to prescribe first and investigate later. It's laziness on the part of the medical profession and the result is that millions of people, including a generation of children are walking around over medicated on substances that should not be in their system and can potentially have long-term disastrous results. To not acknowledge this is just being short-sighted.

                  As a perfect example, ADHD? When I was a child, ages ago, the doctors called it, "having ants in his pants." The prescription? Absolutely nothing. Today? Break out the prescription pad and prescribe something that their only knowledge of is what the pharmaceutical rep told them in a naked effort to reach the bonus check for how much of that drug they can foist on an unsuspecting medical profession and through them, society as a whole.

                  I can be a totally ridiculous person that makes totally ludicrous statements. That's part of my charm. I do not agree with your assessment that this is one of those instances. I have probably dealt with issues pertaining to psychiatric problems and the various treatment protocols for longer than this planet has been pleasantly graced with your presence.

                  You stated previously that I should not make statements based on 'a few' anecdotal experiences of those around me for decades. Yet, you are doing the same based on a single episode by a single individual and concluding that the recovery was actually based on medication. You can assume that, but you have no way to base that assessment on any factual knowledge.

                  I have always regarded your posts as fair, intelligent and usually based on at least a modicum of research on the subject at hand. In this particular instance I do not feel that you are being fair to me based on my lengthy first-hand experiences of my own and hundreds of vets that I have been associated with since 1968.

                  Let's not argue for the sake of having an argument. I'm old, I'm tired and my only motive for posting at all is because I have seen the horrible results that these drugs can have since their inception. I started with drugs that are now anachronistic in the profession and their names would draw a total blank by almost anyone. These include Thorazine, Stelazine, Mellaril and many others.

                  I am happy to defer to your opinion that drugs saved the person that you mentioned. I am not trying to convince you of anything to the contrary. Again, I am simply trying to illuminate the very important fact that these drugs can do more harm than good, especially when used as a first line of treatment by an army of lazy and woefully untrained general practitioners and primary care physicians that prescribe these drugs, willy-nilly to a trusting populace. That's dangerous, has a devastating effect of families and society as a whole and must be recognized by all of us so that vigilance can be the order of the day.

                  I am happy that your friend has made a full recovery, just as I am for my sister. Both suffered the same symptoms yet the proper treatment was in no way similar. This was the only point I was trying to make, without originally bringing my sister, who did not ask to be part of the discussion, into it. My apologies for my clumsy and what you regard 'ridiculous' attempt to do so.

                  Cheers. - Frank
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164347].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                    It wound up that she had a barely functioning thyroid and after 5 days of being treated for that, her 'sanity' returned and she is now home, resting comfortably, without a trace of the wrong medications in her system.
                    I'm not going to argue with someone capable of writing a 5,000 word essay on the topic. Glad it worked out for your sister and glad my friend was not misdiagnosed with a thyroid condition. Suffice it to say that she had been under the care of many physicians for many years... competent physicians who performed all the appropriate tests before coming to conclusions. Before I was diagnosed with clinical depression, I had to have a complete physical exam to rule out physical ailments.

                    to order a full work-up including a comprehensive blood test.
                    This should have been done first. I think her doctors are incompetent.

                    My mother had 3/4 of her thyroid removed because of a rare thyroid disease. It was non-functioning. She never did a bizarre thing in her life.

                    My daughter had hers completely removed last Wednesday. She also never had any instances of bizarre behavior and neither of them were ever suspected of mental illness. Their doctors did the appropriate testing and accurately diagnosed thyroid disease.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164366].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                      I'm not going to argue with someone capable of writing a 5,000 word essay on the topic. Glad it worked out for your sister and glad my friend was not misdiagnosed with a thyroid condition. Suffice it to say that she had been under the care of many physicians for many years... competent physicians who performed all the appropriate tests before coming to conclusions. Before I was diagnosed with clinical depression, I had to have a complete physical exam to rule out physical ailments.

                      This should have been done first. I think her doctors are incompetent.
                      As are, many!

                      My mother had 3/4 of her thyroid removed because of a rare thyroid disease. It was non-functioning. She never did a bizarre thing in her life.

                      My daughter had hers completely removed last Wednesday. She also never had any instances of bizarre behavior and neither of them were ever suspected of mental illness. Their doctors did the appropriate testing and accurately diagnosed thyroid disease.

                      "She never did a bizarre thing in her life."


                      And not every vet suffering from PTSD, whether treated with psychotropic medications, or not, is going to display bizarre symptoms, let alone commit mass-murder.

                      I make no claim to understanding the randomness of the universe and the inhabitants of same. What I do know is that there are no hard and fast rules and that for every particular instance of anything in life, one can generally point to a totally opposite example. Trying to define the undefinable is nothing more than an exercise in futility and to my feeble mind, the true definition of 'crazy.'

                      Cheers. - Frank

                      P.S. Symptoms of Thyroid Dysfunction Can Be Mistaken for Mental Illness

                      For patients with undiagnosed Hashimoto's thyroiditis, the most common cause of hypothyroidism, the picture can be even more grim. Cognitive symptoms associated with Hashimoto's thyroiditis, including mental abnormalities, depression, irritability and confusion, can appear long before a patient shows signs of actual hypothyroidism. Patients can be mislabeled as having a major mental disorder such as psychotic depression, paranoid schizophrenia, or the manic phase of a manic depressive disorder, when the underlying cause of their symptoms is a thyroid disorder.

                      A study released in 1987 suggested that 15% of patients admitted to a psychiatric facility for depression had elements of mild or overt hypothyroidism based on laboratory evaluation.
                      If we've known about the connection between thyroid disease and mental illness for more than four decades, why isn't thyroid testing standard for patients being evaluated for depression, bipolar disorder, or other mental illnesses?

                      A New Advocate for Thyroid Testing in Mental Health Evaluations

                      Dana Trentini, author of the thyroid advocacy blog, Hypothyroid Mom, wants to see this changed. She is championing the cause for thyroid testing in mental disorders in 2013.

                      A thyroid patient herself, Trentini is also a mental health professional with a degree in psychological counseling from Columbia University. She has spent more than 10 years as a career counselor and trainer, helping people who are dealing with job loss or are unsatisfied with their career progression. According to Trentini, job loss and career dissatisfaction are powerful triggers for brain health issues. And yet, despite her education and involvement in the mental health field, Trentini was unaware of the connection between thyroid disease and mental health until her own diagnosis with hypothyroidism in 2006.

                      Trentini stresses that professionals working with individuals suffering from mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, bipolar, and any form of mental health issue, should be aware that an underlying thyroid condition could be at the root of the problem.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164444].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                        Banned
                        Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                        As are, many!
                        I've had one in my life that was purely incompetent. Fortunately, it was just excruciatingly painful rather than life threatening.

                        Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                        P.S. Symptoms of Thyroid Dysfunction Can Be Mistaken for Mental Illness

                        For patients with undiagnosed Hashimoto's thyroiditis, the most common cause of hypothyroidism, the picture can be even more grim. Cognitive symptoms associated with Hashimoto's thyroiditis, including mental abnormalities, depression, irritability and confusion, can appear long before a patient shows signs of actual hypothyroidism.

                        "She never did a bizarre thing in her life."
                        [/quote]

                        She never did a bizarre thing in her life
                        She was diagnosed with Hashimoto's thyroiditis also referred to as Hashimoto's Struma.

                        When I say that my mother never did a bizarre thing in her life ... lol ... I mean it. Victorian, prim, always proper, never a hair out of place.

                        Whether or not a thyroid disease can look like a mental disorder doesn't matter. Any Dr worth his salt is going to do a physical and blood work before making a diagnosis like that.
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164467].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                          Banned
                          Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                          Any Dr worth his salt is going to do a physical and blood work before making a diagnosis like that.
                          And we should all be fortunate enough to find one before the damage is done.

                          Cheers. - Frank
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164478].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                            Banned
                            Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                            And we should all be fortunate enough to find one before the damage is done.

                            Cheers. - Frank
                            I've always used the same due diligence to find a doctor that I would use for any other important purchase. I search on the Internet, I get references (normally a Dr. I'm interested in has been referred by someone I trust) and if a Dr. seems "off" in any way when I first see them, I don't go back. I'm afraid that people have to be informed consumers about their medical care as well as anything else.
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164494].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Midnight Oil
          China heavily regulates firearms, to the point that private citizens are generally not allowed to own them. Between 2010 and 2013, it had 37 school killings involving machetes, meat cleavers, knives, hammers, axes, box cutters and explosives (no reports of guns that I've seen). There were 200 injuries. 25 of those deaths and 55 of the injuries are considered the result of rampage killers. China's media is very restrictive, so there's no way to know how much higher these numbers actually go.

          During the same time period, the U.S. had 87 school shooting deaths. These weren't all rampage killings. They also include suicides, workplace violence, marital problems, gangs and other incidents that spilled over to the schools. There were 80 shooting injuries. 45 of those deaths and 12 of the injuries are considered the result of rampage killers. There were also 10 stabbing deaths and 19 stabbing injuries.

          Taking into consideration China's heavily restricted media and its enormous population (China 1,364,250,000 or 19.1% of world population vs. U.S. 317,979,000 or 4.44% of world population), I think it would be safe to assume that their problem is at least equal to, if not greater, than ours.

          Just looking at the rampage killings alone, they aren't too far from us, and that's with no guns involved.

          It seems to me that, even if we went so far as to take all guns away, the tools used to kill would be the only thing to change.

          List of school-related attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
          List of rampage killers (school massacres) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162752].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Metacomet
          Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

          ...
          When a drug lists side effects of homicidal and suicidal tendencies as side effect warnings right on the bottles you'd think people would "get" it, but they don't. They will swallow anything they are told to.

          ...
          Right, and it's not just that these people are stupid, they aren't (arguably).

          They know what they are risking but are subconsciously willing to take that risk due to deep-seeded self-destructive issues.

          When you tell a person they are liable to kill themselves by doing ____ and they do it, they are acting suicidal.

          When you give suicidal people pills that are liable to make them kill themselves, we shouldn't be surprised that they're willing to take them, as the subconscious issue is still there. They still want to die or hurt themselves and even though the drug (and drug company) claim to help, their subconscious knows the truth (and these ads SPEAK to their subconscious) -

          "Feeling bad? Afraid you'll hurt yourself? Take this. You may end up hurting yourself anyway but it's not your fault, this drug made you do it. Even though you took it to supposedly stop you from doing it. Anyway look at this happy cartoon lady and listen to the pretty xylophone music now."
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163596].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Metacomet
        Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

        I can only speak for myself and many veterans I know that have been subjected to the VA's first line of treatment, but those of us that have stopped taking the prescribed medications did so for one overriding reason. That is the abject fear that we subjected our friends and family to by instantly going to a state of homicidal rage at the slightest provocation.

        I once chased my sister through the house armed with a butcher knife. Had I caught her before she was able to lock herself away, there is no doubt that I would have hacked her to death and probably feasted on her flesh.

        I am probably the gentlest person you would ever hope to meet.

        I would rather live with the vagaries of being profoundly disabled with PTSD than ever take another psychotropic medication again in my life. These drugs are incredibly, immeasurably and insidiously dangerous to those taking them and every single person that they come into contact with.

        Trust me, on this.

        Cheers. - Frank
        Intense.

        And yes, anti-psychotic drugs = psychosis enhancers.

        "Feeling DOWN? Depressed? Take THIS. Side effects may include feeling down. And depressed. Also, murdering your family."
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163589].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    Almost 100% had two other things in common. Statistically, it should be closer to 1%, so I would say it is significant. Alas, BOTH are political.

    As for copycats? The latest supposed attempted bombing included something that was a CRAZY idea! It is SO off the wall, big, etc... that I thought NO such thing would ever be done. I mean PRESSURE COOKERS? REALLY!? I NEVER heard of it in the US, UNTIL that boston marathon bombing! So they were likely copying that!

    As for publicity, you walk a thin line. On the one hand, they SHOULD be publicized, to have them ostracized, and help catch them. On the other hand, I HATE that they get notoriety, and it DOES help copycats, and people that want ANY publicity.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9161003].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
    Banned
    Originally Posted by thunderbird View Post

    Nearly Every Mass Shooting In The Last 20 Years Shares One Thing In Common, And It Isn't Weapons
    "The overwhelming evidence points to the signal largest common factor in all of these incidents is the fact that all of the perpetrators were either actively taking powerful psychotropic drugs or had been at some point in the immediate past before they committed their crimes."
    I'm amazed. You mean that all these mentally ill people did NOT have weapons to blast people into smithereens? Did they murder them by pelting them with their meds or just beat them into oblivion with their hands?

    Amazing to me that people think the gun laws are just fine and it's totally ok for mentally ill to have easy access to any weapons that they want. You notice another common denominator in these cases? These mentally ill people have a shitload of guns and ammo, and of course it's impossible to say what damage these sick people would do without treatment.

    Untreated mental illness an imminent danger?

    How many of the recent mass shootings in the U.S. were preventable tragedies, symptoms of a failing mental health system?

    2013 Sep 29
    More +
    Stumble
    Twitter
    Facebook
    Comments

    The following script is from "Imminent Danger" which aired on Sept. 29, 2013. The correspondent is Steve Kroft. Producers Graham Messick and Coleman Cowan.

    The mass shooting at the Washington Navy Yard two weeks ago that resulted in the deaths of 13 people, including the gunman, was the 23rd such incident in the past seven years. It's becoming harder and harder to ignore the fact that the majority of the people pulling the triggers have turned out to be severely mentally ill -- not in control of their faculties -- and not receiving treatment.

    In the words of one of the country's top psychiatrists, these were preventable tragedies, symptoms of a failed mental health system that's prohibited from intervening until a judge determines that someone presents an "imminent danger to themself or others." The consequence is a society that's neglected millions of seriously ill people hidden in plain sight on the streets of our cities, or locked away in our prisons and jails.

    There is something eerily similar about the shooters, as if they were variations of the same person. All young males, often with the same glazed expression, loners who exhibited bizarre behavior, and withdrew into their own troubled world. They're often portrayed as villains. But Dr. E. Fuller Torrey says their deeds have much more to do with sickness and health than good and evil.

    Dr. Torrey: Every person I've taken care of, and I've taken care of several hundred of these people, had a very good reason for doing what looked to be crazy behavior. But in their mind, it wasn't crazy behavior. It was in response to something that was very logical, that their voices were telling them, or that their delusions were telling them.

    Dr. Torrey is one of the most famous psychiatrists in the country, an expert on severe mental illness, and a staunch critic of the way the country deals with it.

    Steve Kroft: How much of these terrible incidents that we've had, these mass shootings, is traceable to deficiencies in the mental health care system?

    Dr. Torrey: Well, they're directly related. About half of these mass killings are being done by people with severe mental illness, mostly schizophrenia. And if they were being treated, they would've been preventable.

    For example, five weeks before the shooting at the Washington Navy Yard, the gunman, Aaron Alexis, told police that he was hearing voices and being bombarded by strangers with a microwave machine. If he had been transported to a psych ward, the shootings might never have happened.

    In 2007, Virginia Tech student Seung-Hui Cho was behaving so irrationally that a court ordered him to seek mental health care. The order was never carried out. Cho killed himself and 32 others.

    And before James Holmes dressed up as the Joker and shot 70 people in a movie theater, campus police at the University of Colorado had been warned that he was potentially violent. Holmes had been a brilliant graduate student there studying the inner workings of the brain, until something suddenly went wrong with his. Dr. Jeffrey Lieberman, who is president of the American Psychiatric Association, says it's not that unusual.

    Dr. Lieberman: You can be the most popular student, you can be the valedictorian of your class. And if you develop schizophrenia it will change the functioning of your brain and change the nature of your behavior.

    Steve Kroft: You could be completely normal at age 20, perhaps a good student or a gifted student and a solid citizen, and at 21 or 22 be psychotic?

    Dr. Lieberman: Absolutely.

    Dr. Lieberman, who runs the psychiatry department at Columbia University's medical school, says that schizophrenia has a genetic component and tends to run in families, affecting the way the circuits in the brain develop. You can see the structural abnormalities in a brain scan.

    Dr. Lieberman: And you see people, a young adult, with a normal brain, same age with, who has schizophrenia, and you see that degenerative process has already begun.

    Steve Kroft: This is really a disease of the brain. Not a disease of the mind?

    Dr. Lieberman: Absolutely.

    It lies dormant during childhood and usually emerges in late adolescence and early adulthood, affecting perception and judgment. People see things that aren't there and hear voices that aren't real.

    Steve Kroft: What's the nature of these voices and what do they say?

    Dr. Lieberman: Usually it's multiple voices, talking about them in the third person, as if they're not there. They may be saying, "You're a horrible person. Everybody hates you. The only way that you can justify yourself is to lash out at them."

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/untreate...minent-danger/
    The most recent study on mental illness and violence once again shows that mental illness alone does not predict or increase the risk of violence. This study, published last month in the Archives of General Psychiatry, shows that it is only when mental illness is combined with other risk factors such as substance use that the risk of violence increases. Other risk factors for increased violence include a history of juvenile detention or physical abuse, having witnessed domestic violence, a recent divorce and serious family conflict, unemployment, and living in poverty. Other risk factors include being young and male.

    Youth are not violent by nature. Rather, youth violence is nearly always a symptom of other factors in a young person's life. It may be living in poverty, family conflict, or a host of other life circumstances. It may also be undiagnosed and untreated mental illness, especially when combined with a substance use disorder.

    Youth with undiagnosed and untreated mental illnesses are more likely to use and abuse illicit substances and to have their young lives derailed, often with serious consequences.

    We can do a far better job in this nation of identifying youth with emerging mental illnesses early and intervening with effective services and supports. We know a lot about the consequences of undiagnosed and untreated mental illnesses in our nation's youth and the news is not good. We also know that treatment works if youth can get it.

    What do we know about youth and mental illness in our nation?

    In June 2005, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) released the findings of a landmark study with a headline that read "Mental illness exacts heavy toll, beginning in youth." The study found that half of all lifetime cases of mental illness begin by age 14 and that, on average, the delay between the onset of mental illness and treatment is 8 to 10 years. In the life of a young person, that represents the loss of critical developmental years that cannot be recaptured.

    Research shows that 10% of children and adolescents in the United States live with mental illness serious enough to cause significant functional impairment in their day-to-day lives at home, in school and with peers. Yet, only between 20 and 30 percent of these youth are identified and receive services, leaving 70 to 80 percent behind. We cannot ignore these alarming statistics because early-onset mental illnesses that are left untreated are associated with school failure, substance use, homelessness, poverty in adulthood, incarceration, and the ultimate tragedy - suicide.

    http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Sec...ontentID=76175
    http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/direct...nnection.shtml
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162244].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

      I'm amazed. You mean that all these mentally ill people did NOT have weapons to blast people into smithereens? Did they murder them by pelting them with their meds or just beat them into oblivion with their hands?

      Amazing to me that people think the gun laws are just fine and it's totally ok for mentally ill to have easy access to any weapons that they want. You notice another common denominator in these cases? These mentally ill people have a shitload of guns and ammo.
      OK,YOU GOT ME! DING DING DING! One thing most have in common is that They either happened in states that didn't allow guns, or venues that didn't. But HEY, felons, and such people, aren't supposed to have guns ANYWAY! Did YOU know that Germany was not allowed to have guns after WWI?!?!?!? YEP, the COUNTRY(INCLUDING military and POLICE) was not allowed to have weapons from a gun on up. BTW TODAY they have tough laws, but still a bit fair. Hunters don't need a license to hunt, and people with a license, need and training can carry even concealed. With no training, you can have a one shot(w/o license) or gas gun(w/license).

      In the US, only 19th century one shots are freely allowed, and that may soon disappear.

      Mentally ill people aren't supposed to be able to have guns, though WHO can declare them mentally ill?

      TRUE STORY!!!!!!! One person was given the info about an operation that could help relieve pain that he had. He was told that it could greatly DESTROY his life! He said he would rather be DEAD than take such a risk. He vocalized what any SANE person has thought for MILLENIA! I mean would YOU like superhuman sight? Hearing? STRENGTH? SURE you would! So WHY don't you go under the knife? Because you know that they can't do it, and you would likely be blind, deaf, paralyzed, etc... About that HEARING thing! Did you know that NOW many people opt for it? It's TRUE! https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hea...ages/coch.aspx They are VERY hard of hearing, or deaf, so they figure they have NOTHING TO LOSE! Still, I bet the first few were VERY reluctant!

      HECK, I never had lasik for the same reason! I wear glasses, because lasik is too much of a risk! When I had SO many come to me bragging how lasik helped THEM, I researched it. They currently have about ZERO chance of helping me, and I will likely end up with damaged eyes, so I wear glasses. I have always been a bit odd, so it came as no surprise to me that I am far sighted and most others ,without 20/20 sight, are NEARSIGHTED!

      So how did the DOCTOR take it? Bare in mind, that the statement translates to "DOCTOR, I think YOU might fail and I could not live with such limitations, so I will say NO WAY!"! The doctor felt:

      1. SUICIDAL(This is a FALSE assumption from the getgo, but he ran with it)
      2. He is therefore MENTALLY ILL! (AGAIN, FALSE ASSUMPTION)
      3. Better tell the government!!!!!

      The government ended up at the patient's door demanding ALL guns! They searched EVERYWHERE! ALL because he tried to make it clear to the doctor that he would NOT have such an operation!

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162310].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
      Banned
      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

      Amazing to me that people think the gun laws are just fine and it's totally ok for mentally ill to have easy access to any weapons that they want.
      Because of my PTSD I am precluded by law from purchasing or possessing any firearms.

      There are a lot of people that should real damned happy about that.

      Cheers. - Frank
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162821].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
        Soooo, nobody noticed that this article was on a pro-gun website? The first thing in the article is a link to ammoland.com.

        And.......

        Of course, all the examples had people who took medications. You simply don't include the cases where drugs weren't used....

        And it hasn't occurred to anyone that the article has an agenda?

        This isn't a news website, folks. It's a political website.
        Signature
        One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

        Terence Fletcher: "There are no two words in the English language more harmful than Good Job." Whiplash.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162854].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author candoit2
          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

          Soooo, nobody noticed that this article was on a pro-gun website? The first thing in the article is a link to ammoland.com.

          And.......

          Of course, all the examples had people who took medications. You simply don't include the cases where drugs weren't used....

          And it hasn't occurred to anyone that the article has an agenda?

          This isn't a news website, folks. It's a political website.
          So just like CNN, CBC, BBC, RT, ALZ etc

          No news site is there as a public service, they all are about making money, and pushing an agenda.

          Doesn't mean everything they say has no truth to it. It's all slanted though in favor of what their view is.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162865].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
            Originally Posted by AaronJones View Post

            So just like CNN, CBC, BBC, RT, ALZ etc

            No news site is there as a public service, they all are about making money, and pushing an agenda.

            Doesn't mean everything they say has no truth to it. It's all slanted though in favor of what their view is.
            Aaron; No. They are all about making money from advertising income. The websites tend to be more about pushing a political or religious agenda.

            To be honest, I didn't read the article. Once I see where it's from, and what view it has, I know I'm not getting real news.
            Signature
            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

            Terence Fletcher: "There are no two words in the English language more harmful than Good Job." Whiplash.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162896].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
            Originally Posted by AaronJones View Post

            So just like CNN, CBC, BBC, RT, ALZ etc
            No news site is there as a public service, they all are about making money, and pushing an agenda.
            Aaron, actually the BBC is a public service broadcaster.

            .
            Signature
            TOP TIP: To browse the forum like a Pro, select "View Classic" from the drop-down menu under your user name.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162930].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author seasoned
              Originally Posted by Frank Donovan View Post

              Aaron, actually the BBC is a public service broadcaster.

              .
              It doesn't matter, they are STILL pushing an agenda! HECK, even the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE is pushing an agenda. What's MORE is that past winners get a SPECIAL PRIORITY vote! A nomination from THEM can happen LATER and be counted ahead of any other. So that ENSURES that, for the foreseeable future, the current agenda will continue.

              Just for US presidents, I believe there are now *****FOUR***** in that list! They might as well be clones.

              Steve
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162969].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
                Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                It doesn't matter, they are STILL pushing an agenda! HECK, even the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE is pushing an agenda.
                Um... Baffling non sequitur notwithstanding, I'd ask you to elaborate on what agenda you think the BBC are pushing, but we should probably not move the thread off track.

                .
                Signature
                TOP TIP: To browse the forum like a Pro, select "View Classic" from the drop-down menu under your user name.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163041].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

          Soooo, nobody noticed that this article was on a pro-gun website? The first thing in the article is a link to ammoland.com.

          And.......

          Of course, all the examples had people who took medications. You simply don't include the cases where drugs weren't used....

          And it hasn't occurred to anyone that the article has an agenda?

          This isn't a news website, folks. It's a political website.
          It's just one of a number of sources that are reporting on this story. I don't consider myself qualified to usefully comment on its merits one way or the other. That is why I was asking.

          All the responses pro and con are compelling. Treating mental illness is clearly not a challenge with simple and absolute answers.

          I don't know if anyone here caught the news of a young man in Calgary (Canada) stabbing several recent graduates to death at a celebration party he was invited to. I don't know if he was known to be mentally ill or on medication:
          Making sense of Calgary's senseless mass killing | Mayerthorpe Freelancer
          Signature

          Project HERE.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162882].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

          Soooo, nobody noticed that this article was on a pro-gun website? The first thing in the article is a link to ammoland.com.

          And.......

          Of course, all the examples had people who took medications. You simply don't include the cases where drugs weren't used....

          And it hasn't occurred to anyone that the article has an agenda?

          This isn't a news website, folks. It's a political website.
          Then go through the current ones and try to find ones that don't match. I heard of three supposed exceptions, and it turned out there WEREN'T! But to say THIS is biased because it is pro gun has one MAJOR flaw! The opposing side is ANTI gun. At this point, I would love to put a famous picture up. ALAS!

          As for a religious bias? Outside of SOME that are in the business of faith, I haven't seen that expressed AT ALL, when talking about the news! But who knows. I found a jewish(by birth, heritage, and upbringing,even a barmitzvah) person that now claims to be devoutly christian, but very antisemitic(even by his OWN admission), that CLEARLY shows an agenda, but STILL tells the truth. He is on youtube.

          Yeah, there is a set of FACTS and probably 5 or 6 sets of conspiracy theories as to how they came to be. He just picks a conspiracy theory set that fits his agenda. Those people STILL did what he claimed, and the things are STILL changing things as he said. Many HERE may say OH, it is the RICH! Or OH, it is the BANKERS! Or OH, it is WALL STREET! Or OH, it is special secret society X! Or OH, it is such and such party, etc.... But that doesn't change the known facts.

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162952].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
            Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

            Then go through the current ones and try to find ones that don't match. I heard of three supposed exceptions, and it turned out there WEREN'T! But to say THIS is biased because it is pro gun has one MAJOR flaw! The opposing side is ANTI gun. At this point, I would love to put a famous picture up. ALAS!

            As for a religious bias? Outside of SOME that are in the business of faith, I haven't seen that expressed AT ALL, when talking about the news! But who knows. I found a jewish(by birth, heritage, and upbringing,even a barmitzvah) person that now claims to be devoutly christian, but very antisemitic(even by his OWN admission), that CLEARLY shows an agenda, but STILL tells the truth. He is on youtube.

            Yeah, there is a set of FACTS and probably 5 or 6 sets of conspiracy theories as to how they came to be. He just picks a conspiracy theory set that fits his agenda. Those people STILL did what he claimed, and the things are STILL changing things as he said. Many HERE may say OH, it is the RICH! Or OH, it is the BANKERS! Or OH, it is WALL STREET! Or OH, it is special secret society X! Or OH, it is such and such party, etc.... But that doesn't change the known facts.

            Steve
            Steve. No disrespect intended, but I've gone through this post about 4 times, and I have no idea what you are talking about. Was this supposed to be a reply to my post?

            And a serious question; After you write your posts and then post them, do you ever read them? Do they still make perfect sense to you? In other words, can you follow what you just posted? I keep thinking I've overheard a part of a conversation you are having, with someone else, that we have never met.

            If you like, I can take a paragraph you've written, and show you what I mean.

            I'm serious. You may not be conscious of what you are doing.
            Signature
            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

            Terence Fletcher: "There are no two words in the English language more harmful than Good Job." Whiplash.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163579].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author seasoned
              Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

              Steve. No disrespect intended, but I've gone through this post about 4 times, and I have no idea what you are talking about. Was this supposed to be a reply to my post?

              And a serious question; After you write your posts and then post them, do you ever read them? Do they still make perfect sense to you? In other words, can you follow what you just posted? I keep thinking I've overheard a part of a conversation you are having, with someone else, that we have never met.

              If you like, I can take a paragraph you've written, and show you what I mean.

              I'm serious. You may not be conscious of what you are doing.
              OK, I should have been a bit clearer...

              I DO read them. Granted, I have to sanitize some things a bit. I think they are generally a bit easier to understand than this one though, in context, this is better. And you referred to religious bias as if to say they all harp on creationism, angels, god, etc... Most DON'T!

              You should go through the current cases of shootings and try to find ones that don't match, their claims. I heard of three supposed exceptions, and it turned out they WEREN'T exceptions! But to say THIS is biased because it is pro gun has one MAJOR flaw! The opposing side is ANTI gun(At least for all non government people). At this point, I would love to put a famous picture up. ALAS...TOO political!

              As for a religious bias? Outside of SOME that are in the business of faith, I haven't seen that expressed AT ALL, when talking about the news! But who knows. I found a jewish(by birth, heritage, and upbringing,even a barmitzvah) person that now claims to be devoutly christian, but very antisemitic(even by his OWN admission), that CLEARLY shows an agenda, but STILL tells the truth. He is on youtube.

              Yeah, there is a set of FACTS and probably 5 or 6 sets of conspiracy theories as to how they came to be. He just picks a conspiracy theory set that fits his agenda. Those people STILL did what he claimed, and the things are STILL changing things as he said they would. Many HERE may say "OH, it is the RICH!", or "OH, it is the BANKERS!", or "OH, it is WALL STREET!", or "OH, it is special secret society X!", or "OH, it is such and such party", etc.... But that doesn't change the known facts.

              BTW I said Society X because X could be Aliens, Spys, Bilderburger, Masons, Skull and Bones, etc....

              Steve
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163626].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                OK, I should have been a bit clearer...

                I DO read them. Granted, I have to sanitize some things a bit. I think they are generally a bit easier to understand than this one though, in context, this is better. And you referred to religious bias as if to say they all harp on creationism, angels, god, etc... Most DON'T!
                Steve; I wasn't talking about this website. This is a political website, not a religious one.

                Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                You should go through the current cases of shootings and try to find ones that don't match, their claims. I heard of three supposed exceptions, and it turned out they WEREN'T exceptions! But to say THIS is biased because it is pro gun has one MAJOR flaw! The opposing side is ANTI gun(At least for all non government people). At this point, I would love to put a famous picture up. ALAS...TOO political!
                And how does the existence of Anti-gun websites, not make this a Pro-gun website? Both are about as biased as you can get. Although pro-gun websites have an industry behind them, and anti-gun websites do not.

                ("Anti-gun" is misleading. Almost nobody is "Anti-gun". Many are "Pro-background check". It's a way to paint the opposing side. Creating a Straw Man to fight against.)
                Signature
                One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                Terence Fletcher: "There are no two words in the English language more harmful than Good Job." Whiplash.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164596].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                  Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                  Steve; I wasn't talking about this website. This is a political website, not a religious one.
                  I was just talking about what YOU did.

                  And how does the existence of Anti-gun websites, not make this a Pro-gun website? Both are about as biased as you can get. Although pro-gun websites have an industry behind them, and anti-gun websites do not.
                  ANTI-GUN DO have an organization against them. A BIG one that DWARFS the NRA! Using the term industry here is misleading.

                  ("Anti-gun" is misleading. Almost nobody is "Anti-gun". Many are "Pro-background check". It's a way to paint the opposing side. Creating a Straw Man to fight against.)
                  Do they want to get rid of guns for all others? YEP! They have SAID SO!


                  And they have STOLEN guns! They have made guns retroactively ILLEGAL! MANY gun owners in Massachusetts
                  , New York, and Connecticut, had to turn in guns or be declared FELONS! BTW that is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!!!! ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 3 "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." The laws in those states ARE ex post facto here, and they HAVE passed a bill of attainder to those breaking it. Never mind the 2nd amendment.

                  Do they want to get rid of them for themselves? OF COURSE NOT! They ARE trying to get rid of guns effectively in the military. FT HOOD should have been IMPOSSIBLE! If hassan fired a shot, the others should have taken cover, and taken turns playing "HIT THE ENEMY SNIPER"! But they were actually FORBIDDEN to have guns there! INCREDIBLE!

                  So say what you want, but as far as OVER 300 MILLION people in the US are concerned, they ARE anti gun!

                  Steve
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164876].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                    Do they want to get rid of guns for all others? YEP! They have SAID SO!
                    You keep showing or mentioning Diane Feinstein in these gun control threads as if it were relevant what she thinks about anything. One lone politician is all you can come up as evidence of an enormous anti-gun movement. Fact is, her opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Gun legislation doesn't get anywhere in this country and the majority of people in this country want to curb violence ... not ban guns. They want a few simple measures like no high capacity magazines and gun background checks (might even weed out some of the looney tunes buying guns).

                    The NRA will continue to service the constituents that are its partner, the gun manufacturers, without regard for safety and human life.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9165506].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                      You keep showing or mentioning Diane Feinstein in these gun control threads as if it were relevant what she thinks about anything. One lone politician is all you can come up as evidence of an enormous anti-gun movement. Fact is, her opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Gun legislation doesn't get anywhere in this country and the majority of people in this country want to curb violence ... not ban guns. They want a few simple measures like no high capacity magazines and gun background checks (might even weed out some of the looney tunes buying guns).

                      The NRA will continue to service the constituents that are its partner, the gun manufacturers, without regard for safety and human life.
                      Suzanne; You're going to lose this one. You are an intelligent beautiful flower..fighting an avalanche of shit.
                      Signature
                      One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                      Terence Fletcher: "There are no two words in the English language more harmful than Good Job." Whiplash.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9165544].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                      You keep showing or mentioning Diane Feinstein in these gun control threads as if it were relevant what she thinks about anything. One lone politician is all you can come up as evidence of an enormous anti-gun movement. Fact is, her opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Gun legislation doesn't get anywhere in this country and the majority of people in this country want to curb violence ... not ban guns. They want a few simple measures like no high capacity magazines and gun background checks (might even weed out some of the looney tunes buying guns).

                      The NRA will continue to service the constituents that are its partner, the gun manufacturers, without regard for safety and human life.
                      I've heard SEVERAL! Even OBAMA and BIDEN say the SAME! Boxer was just SO open about it. And she isn't just some nothing rep. She works TIRELESSLY to get her agendas passed. As for Obama, this is still a bit late, but:


                      Camels nose under the tent? INTERESTING!!!!!!

                      And he DOES talk about banning "assault weapons". Assault weapons have been banned COUNTRY WIDE for DECADES! I would need a very special license(that even many firearm DEALERS don't have) to even POSSESS one,since 1934! But what THEY now call assault weapons are NORMAL weapons with things like a handle, maybe a magazine, etc...

                      The term "assault weapon" refers primarily but not exclusively to semi-automatic firearms that are able to accept detachable magazines and possess certain features.

                      Semi automatic firearms generally DO have a detachable magazine, unless they use the belt feed type mechanism, or a clip, though I don't know if any small guns use that.

                      Semi-automatic firearms, when fired, automatically extract the spent cartridge casing and load the next cartridge into the chamber, ready to fire again. They do not fire automatically like a machine gun. Rather, only one round is fired with each trigger pull.

                      The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban did not apply to fully automatic weapons. Federal laws state that weapons that possess the operational features of assault rifles are Title II weapons, not assault weapons. (Title II weapons are heavily regulated by the National Firearms Act (NFA) of June 26, 1934, passed in response to infamous Prohibition era use of Thompson Submachine Guns and the US Army's M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle.

                      And MOST guns people have bought DON'T hold 30+ rounds. They have typically been around 16+1. But NOW, you have states limiting that to as few as 5. The interesting thing is that some may opt for a revolver with a speed loader. It can be almost as fast as a 6+ shot semi.

                      So even if they "didn't ban guns", they are STILL working to ban guns through the SAME mechanism the last video I spoke of talks about. They are trying to make people think that we are talking about the machine gun type weapons people see in the movies.

                      HECK, BIDEN even suggested getting a shotgun(claiming they were more accurate), and that you fire two warning shots. People have laughed because that tells your foe that you are now likely UNARMED! As for being MORE accurate? They are generally LESS accurate! A 9mm could shoot a grouping within a couple inches dozens of yards away(each shot being about 9mm(less than 1/2"!). A shotgun would(with ONE cartridge), generally shoot over an area over a yard wide, unless you happen to use a slug. Not accurate OR precise!


                      Shotguns have generally NOT been legislated because they are so imprecise,can clearly be used for hunting, etc.... So WHY are they used for hunting? A slug can easily take down a deer. It is likely quicker, and maybe more humane than a smaller slug. The normal gun shot can be used to shoot at flocks of ducks. Obviously it is harder to hit a flying duck with a bullet.

                      I found an excellent video that shows problems with what BO is saying, but it is even more insulting to BO than the above to biden. It closes with rahm emanuels heartless, insulting, and forboding comment of "You never want a serious crises go to waste". The idea is you appreciate a crises like sandy hook, because you can use it to shove legislation down people's throats on the idea that they may then accept it.

                      Steve
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9165658].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                        Banned
                        Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                        I've heard SEVERAL! Even OBAMA and BIDEN say the SAME!
                        Steve
                        Steve ... whole post was just blah blah blah. Noise. Not a fact in it to support that there is any legislation making it through anywhere in the country banning guns. None. Nada. Zip. Ain't going to happen. So stop your fear mongering and using your little videos to make it look like there's massive legislation going on to remove 2nd Amendment rights. People saying something on a Youtube video does not make legislation pass.

                        There won't even be common sense measures to make the country safer for innocent victims and children to live. So you can rest assured, although you won't, that eventually, there will be at least 300 guns per 100 citizens rather than the paltry number of only 89 guns and that high capacity magazines will remain in the hands of mentally ill people to make it an absolute certainty that they can achieve maximum kill when they go on a rampage.

                        Anyway, I know what I have heard. I know what they are talking about. I know how they will morph this as they have started to ALREADY. But I also know what side you and claud are on, and I guess I shouldn't talk about it here anymore. Your loss.
                        You don't have a clue what side I'm on. Your head is so full of NRA propaganda, nothing else gets through on this topic.
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9166845].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                          Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                          Steve ... whole post was just blah blah blah. Noise. Not a fact in it to support that there is any legislation making it through anywhere in the country banning guns. None. Nada. Zip. Ain't going to happen. So stop your fear mongering and using your little videos to make it look like there's massive legislation going on to remove 2nd Amendment rights. People saying something on a Youtube video does not make legislation pass.
                          WOW! You are just making the rest of your post nonsense with this dreck. I could have looked for text, but I wanted something a bit more visual. But I didn't want to waste my time looking for it here.

                          There won't even be common sense measures to make the country safer for innocent victims and children to live. So you can rest assured, although you won't, that eventually, there will be at least 300 guns per 100 citizens rather than the paltry number of only 89 guns and that high capacity magazines will remain in the hands of mentally ill people to make it an absolute certainty that they can achieve maximum kill when they go on a rampage.
                          See! THAT is the type of thinking they WANT! Some people have a LOT of guns. There could be some legitimate reasons. WHO KNOWS? HECK, the way they count such stats, they could EVEN be counting salespeople or manufacturers. Adam Lanza seems to be nuts, and HE got guns. He took them from his mother. GRANTED, she didn't try to prevent it, but the fact is they were available to him. That kind of stuff will ALWAYS happen. SOME, like biden, want these geared towards a bracelet, but THAT presents problems ALSO. Besides, it would NOT work. Such stuff has been tried before. It ALWAYS fails and hurts the innocent, and the guilty ALWAYS find a way to disable it.

                          You don't have a clue what side I'm on. Your head is so full of NRA propaganda, nothing else gets through on this topic.
                          I knew you would write a post like this,and the kind of things you would say, so I guess I am close! I thought like this before I even heard of the NRA. Until recently, I didn't even watch these NRA videos. I only do now because a site has about 25 videos a week, and one of them may be from the nra, and I have been watching them. They haven't changed my opinions though.

                          HECK, I watch LOTS of videos that are AGAINST my views in some way, and I don't change my opinion. I have watched lots of videos I don't like, and I don't suddenly like them.

                          As for getting through? I have an open mind. I was once told that I felt the way I did because I listened to too much rush limbaugh. Well, I felt the way I did over a DECADE before I ever heard of rush limbaugh AND, though I was listening to rush limbaugh at the time, I probably heard the likes of Bill press over TWICE as much. Take someone as far left as rush limbaugh is to the right, and shift him to the left a couple times as much as he is, and you have bill press.

                          Heck, HERE is the blurb google pulls from wikipedia:

                          William H. "Bill" Press is a US talk radio host, liberal political commentator and author. He was chair of the California Democratic Party from 1993 to 1996.
                          Here is the clincher. I had a jewish friend at the time that said rush limbaugh was SO racist, etc... I brought him a rush limbaugh newsletter to read. When I asked for it a week latter, I found that he hadn't even glanced at it. FUNNY THING! At the time, rush limbaugh was really advertising a new drink company. People claimed it was RACIST! "It has a SLAVE SHIP on the label, and the K in a circle is to show affiliateion with the KKK!" TWO problems! The ship was NOT a slave ship. The K in a circle meant KOSHER! The owners were jewish.

                          And SORRY if I pick the same anecdotes. I just don't like thinking about some garbage. HECK, I may talk about a few success stories all the time but, given the need and/or time, I can come up with a lot more. Luckily I am in a state that still has some gun freedoms, and I am not crazy or being treated for any mental problems, and have not been arrested, etc... so the police have pretty much left me alone.

                          Steve
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9167019].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                            Banned
                            Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                            WOW! You are just making the rest of your post nonsense with this dreck. I could have looked for text, but I wanted something a bit more visual. But I didn't want to waste my time looking for it here.
                            I'm sorry but you have failed to point to legislation that has passed that bans guns in any way. Youtube videos with people saying stuff is not legislation and legislation is the only thing that matters when it comes to ... well, law.


                            Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                            Adam Lanza seems to be nuts, and HE got guns. He took them from his mother. GRANTED, she didn't try to prevent it, but the fact is they were available to him.
                            Lanzas' mother got shot to death and deserved it. She knew her son was a nutcase and encouraged him to use those guns and taught him to use them and let him have free access. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

                            Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                            As for getting through? I have an open mind. Steve
                            :rolleyes::p
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9167290].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                              Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                              Lanzas' mother got shot to death and deserved it. She knew her son was a nutcase and encouraged him to use those guns and taught him to use them and let him have free access. Live by the sword, die by the sword.



                              :rolleyes::p
                              I guess we have different definitions of open mind. My definition is "Willing to look at opposing facts, and accept opposing views as true if there is a substantial reason to believe they are." It does NOT mean ignoring opposing information, and parroting the given information as true simply on another's say so.

                              Steve
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9168113].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                                Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                                I guess we have different definitions of open mind.
                                Steve
                                No. All you need to do is point a link to any legislation that has passed that will take away guns from anyone in the US.

                                Not people on Youtube talking about proposed legislation...but actual legislation from a non NRA type website.

                                If you did that, you would completely change my mind about this issue in one second. And that would sure make me shut up about it.

                                So, the legislation either exists, or it doesn't. You can solve this debate forever...in a quick Google search.

                                No need to debate, or rant, when you can offer conclusive proof.
                                Signature
                                One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                                Terence Fletcher: "There are no two words in the English language more harmful than Good Job." Whiplash.
                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9168143].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                                  Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

                                  No. All you need to do is point a link to any legislation that has passed that will take away guns from anyone in the US.

                                  Not people on Youtube talking about proposed legislation...but actual legislation from a non NRA type website.

                                  If you did that, you would completely change my mind about this issue in one second. And that would sure make me shut up about it.

                                  So, the legislation either exists, or it doesn't. You can solve this debate forever...in a quick Google search.

                                  No need to debate, or rant, when you can offer conclusive proof.
                                  If only it WERE that simple. As for legislation, I NEVER claimed that anything passed to eradicate them yet. With a few tweaks, ANY of them COULD though. But did I say they PASSED? NOPE! ONLY that they want to are building suport to do that, and in some circumstances have for people or areas.

                                  BTW the NRA didn't, to the best of my knowledge, EVER say such legislation(affecting all people and guns) passed.

                                  BTW we may NEVER know if it were even proposed. In such a case, they would likely vote it down and, being voted down, they would water it down until we got something like what we got.

                                  Steve
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9168376].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                                    Banned
                                    Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                                    As for legislation, I NEVER claimed that anything passed to eradicate them yet. With a few tweaks, ANY of them COULD though.

                                    Steve
                                    Steve, you're a gifted comedian. Congress has spent the last 6 years sitting on their little and big tushies doing whatever they can possibly do to NOT pass legislation, except legislation that they know does not have a snowball's chance in hell of getting through the Senate.

                                    With a few tweaks, gun laws could pass? On what planet?
                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9168429].message }}
                                    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                                      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                                      Steve, you're a gifted comedian. Congress has spent the last 6 years sitting on their little and big tushies doing whatever they can possibly do to NOT pass legislation, except legislation that they know does not have a snowball's chance in hell of getting through the Senate.

                                      With a few tweaks, gun laws could pass? On what planet?
                                      GIVE ME A BREAK! And you call ME a comedian? They passed laws in 1934, for the ENTIRE US, POLICE INCLUDED! The tweak? It was ONLY machine guns and some larger calibers, etc.... Remember al cappone, etc? They actually did that sort of thing back then! HEY, ONE guy was named after one! Machine Gun Kelly - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                                      LATER, they decided to pass all these laws about "assault weapons" which really aren't assault weapons. And SOME areas, like chicago and DC, DO, or DID, ban guns OUTRIGHT. But to say that you can't get such a law through is just ignoring the fact that it has ALREADY been done!

                                      They do it ALL THE TIME! Even the ACA, as one sided as it was, passed ONLY because it was TWEAKED so much. They recently did some obvious tweaking on the farm bill.

                                      Gun Control - Just Facts

                                      I have a link for a beautiful cartoon to put here. ALAS!....

                                      Steve
                                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9168629].message }}
                                      • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
                                        Banned
                                        Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                                        GIVE ME A BREAK! And you call ME a comedian? They passed laws in 1934, for the ENTIRE US, POLICE INCLUDED! The tweak? It was ONLY machine guns and some larger calibers, etc....
                                        Steve
                                        Damn ... you're right. I forgot all about '34 and machine guns and cannons and stuff. Silly me. :p

                                        I guess I should have clarified that I was talking about this Congress and this President and this century or at least at some time after I was actually born.

                                        But I'm convinced now. I'm flipping over. How dare the gov take away automatic weapons and cannons and rocket launchers and all that great stuff. I think everyone should have at least one tommy gun and a cannon and a rocket launcher, especially the mentally ill. They should have two. There. We agree now, so we're done here.

                                        ... and that "documentary" propaganda Scientology video with the fake Ph.D. shills ... that's so totally right on.
                                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9168659].message }}
                                        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                                          Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                                          Damn ... you're right. I forgot all about '34 and machine guns and cannons and stuff. Silly me. :p

                                          I guess I should have clarified that I was talking about this Congress and this President and this century or at least at some time after I was actually born.

                                          But I'm convinced now. I'm flipping over. How dare the gov take away automatic weapons and cannons and rocket launchers and all that great stuff. I think everyone should have at least one tommy gun and a cannon and a rocket launcher, especially the mentally ill. They should have two. There. We agree now, so we're done here.
                                          You should be on SNL! I am OK with the 1934 ban, as long as they do it reasonably. SO far, it HAS been reasonable.

                                          Registration goes perhaps a little too far. Apparently, they are NOW working on a sample database, that a number of states are complying with. Of course, this will be from the final dealer which ITSELF is a mistake.

                                          Basically, a distributor could have someone use a gun to kill someone, put it in stock, they sell it to me, register it, and next thing you know, the government is knocking at my door for having murdered the person murdered by someone else. The ONE piece missing here, until recently, has been a test bullet, and apparently THAT is now being provided. Sounds like a GREAT idea until you bring theft, impersonation, and time into the picture.

                                          As for mentally ill? AGAIN, WHO determines that?

                                          Steve
                                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9168819].message }}
                                          • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
                                            Originally Posted by seasoned View Post


                                            As for mentally ill? AGAIN, WHO determines that?

                                            Steve
                                            Psychics. I've read that they can do amazing things.
                                            Signature
                                            One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

                                            Terence Fletcher: "There are no two words in the English language more harmful than Good Job." Whiplash.
                                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9170534].message }}
                                            • Profile picture of the author BigFrank
                                              Banned
                                              Well, after reading all of this I have only one thing to say. I want my own Abrams tank. Pronto. How dare they prevent me from having one? I thought this was America. I thought there was an unwavering second amendment. I THOUGHT WE WERE FREE.

                                              What the hell am I supposed to do when my neighbor has a loud party?

                                              Par-doan my French - but this sucks!

                                              Cheers. - Frank
                                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9170868].message }}
                                              • Profile picture of the author candoit2
                                                Originally Posted by BigFrank View Post

                                                Well, after reading all of this I have only one thing to say. I want my own Abrams tank. Pronto. How dare they prevent me from having one? I thought this was America. I thought there was an unwavering second amendment. I THOUGHT WE WERE FREE.
                                                What the hell am I supposed to do when my neighbor has a loud party?

                                                Par-doan my French - but this sucks!

                                                Cheers. - Frank
                                                Just go over to the neighbours party and drink all their beer. Beers gone, party dies out. Still have good relationship with neighbor.

                                                Frank the tank
                                                Signature

                                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9173416].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

                      You keep showing or mentioning Diane Feinstein in these gun control threads as if it were relevant what she thinks about anything. One lone politician is all you can come up as evidence of an enormous anti-gun movement. Fact is, her opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Gun legislation doesn't get anywhere in this country and the majority of people in this country want to curb violence ... not ban guns. They want a few simple measures like no high capacity magazines and gun background checks (might even weed out some of the looney tunes buying guns).

                      The NRA will continue to service the constituents that are its partner, the gun manufacturers, without regard for safety and human life.
                      Another statement in that video I didn't show was a reminder that he WAS turned down for buying a rifle, and used 2 15 round pistols from his mother:

                      MILLER: Adam Lanza shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown final report - Washington Times

                      And I swear, every time I see that picture, I think he looks alien, and deranged! But HEY, it turns out the state wouldn't even TALK to him about owning a weapon anyway! He was TOO YOUNG!

                      Anyway, I know what I have heard. I know what they are talking about. I know how they will morph this as they have started to ALREADY. But I also know what side you and claud are on, and I guess I shouldn't talk about it here anymore. Your loss.

                      Steve
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9165701].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    ALSO, REMEMBER! You CAN'T claim that laws aren't enforced, or there are bad records. THAT shoots down your case ALSO! HECK, you can even claim that only police and military should have guns!

    Fort Hood shooter snapped over denial of request for leave, Army confirms | Fox News

    Army Commander Suggests Americans

    The Manhunt for Christopher Dorner - Los Angeles Times

    IMAGINE! The police had to fight a guy that could have been just a LITTLE bit better and picked them off one by one. If not for the supposed DNA test of bone marrow from charred remains, I could question if they even know he is dead.

    And there is a saying catching on: "When SECONDS count, the police will be there in MINUTES!"! In a new glock commercial, a passenger holds a blade to a drivers throat. The DRIVER has a gun and a bit of training, and gets out of it. It turns out HE was an undercover cop, and caught the bad guy. Not too long ago, a little girl called her mother, and then 911. This isn't even the one I was thinking of BUT....

    http://newsok.com/durant-girl-12-tal...rticle/3720428

    I can tell you he wasn't looking for food! He would have been less insistent and, if he went inside, he wouldn't be looking in a bathroom closet.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162332].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9162740].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
      Banned
      Pamela A. Popper is a naturopath, nutritionist and the Executive Director of The Wellness Forum, a chain of licensed health and wellness centers located throughout the U.S. She's also a lobbyist and you can bet your patootie that she is in the "Wellness" biz for profit. I imagine she's 'making a killin' off of the chain of wellness centers.

      Oh ... this documentary is also Scientology propaganda.
      Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) ....CCHR was co-founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology

      Seemingly associated with CCHR is none other than Popper
      On this week's show Dr. Pamela Popper reveals how dietary deficiencies can be the source of emotional troubles.
      Pamela Popper claims Ph.D.s from two institutions, Clayton College and Central States College of Health Sciences.

      Clayton College is no longer accepting phone calls and appears to be shutting down.
      http://www.ccnh.edu/


      Central States College of Health Sciences
      Home
      They appear to rent space at a Columbus, Ohio hospital.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163168].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author waterotter
    Blood chemistry. When the right chemistry was introduced into her blood stream, she became a fully functioning mother, worker, and friend.
    Exactly!

    Here in Canada, doctors get a kickback for every prescription drug they hand out. I don't know if this applies in the US. Doctors, in general are too quick to write out a prescription without knowing all the facts.

    It's a fine line to walk, but I feel that frequent follow-ups along with testing (including blood work etc.) to better determine an underlying illness is a must. This goes as far as seeing a "qualified" doctor, be it a Psychologist or Psychiatrist who can administer the appropriate tests to determine the proper course of action.

    Once medication is dispensed, regular follow-up appointments should be mandated. We have way to many people walking the streets who have gone off their med's and become a danger to society. We also have folks on the wrong med's that also become a real danger.

    When the "right" medication is being taken for a specific condition, and that drug is working, making sure that individual continues to take their med's on an ongoing basis is a necessity.

    Many of the psychotic drugs have scary side-effects. Maybe 24 hour supervision is needed until it's deemed the individual taking that drug isn't going to be a threat.

    I guess it's a catch-22. What works for one, may not necessarily work for another.

    Moo.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163032].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Originally Posted by waterotter View Post

      Exactly!

      Here in Canada, doctors get a kickback for every prescription drug they hand out. I don't know if this applies in the US. Doctors, in general are too quick to right out a prescription without knowing all the facts.

      It's a fine line to walk, but I feel that frequent follow-ups along with testing (including blood work etc.) to better determine an underlying illness is a must. This goes as far as seeing a "qualified" doctor, be it a Psychologist or Psychiatrist who can administer the appropriate tests to determine the proper course of action.

      Once medication is dispensed, regular follow-up appointments should be mandated. We have way to many people walking the streets who have gone off their med's and become a danger to society. We also have folks on the wrong med's that also become a real danger.

      When the "right" medication is being taken for a specific condition, and that drug is working, making sure that individual continues to take their med's on an ongoing basis is a necessity.

      Many of the psychotic drugs have scary side-effects. Maybe 24 hour supervision is needed until it's deemed the individual taking that drug isn't going to be a threat.

      I guess it's a catch-22. What works for one, may not necessarily work for another.

      Moo.
      In the US doctors and psychiatrists both make a killing (somewhat literlly) drugging people. I know very few people who aren't on one form of drug or another. Some are on several. Some are so drooling stupid from their drugging that they can barely perform the simplest tasks of the normal human intellect. Of course - some of those psycho drugs act like speed so it does snap up alertness a tad - I wouldn't want to be the person on those long term, though and find out what they do LONG term. Sometimes some things that seem to help short term are completely and irreversibly destructive in the long-term. That's okay - as long as the "expert" gets rich, who cares about the average Joe.

      I see a lot of people willing to believe anything a doctor or shrink tells them. I wonder how many here will actually watch that documentary I posted.

      BTW - as far as anti/pro gun remarks. We don't have any anti-gun people in this country - we just have people who think the only people who should be armed are governments. Gov killed 100 mil of their OWN people in the last century, so not sure how they construct their arguments. It's not from logical quantums, that's for sure.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163045].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by waterotter View Post

      Here in Canada, doctors get a kickback for every prescription drug they hand out. I don't know if this applies in the US. Doctors, in general are too quick to right out a prescription without knowing all the facts.
      In the US, they MIGHT get a kickback BUT.....

      They can get special recognition by the drug company.
      They can get FREE samples
      They can get advertising

      So they DO benefit in the US.

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163410].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author waterotter
    Sometimes some things that seem to help short term are completely and irreversibly destructive in the long-term.
    The exact reason that I suggested regular follow-up appointments should be mandated.

    I see a lot of people willing to believe anything a doctor or shrink tells them.
    As I mentioned, seeing a "qualified" doctor, be it a Psychologist or Psychiatrist. By this, I meant a doctor that specializes in whatever field is required, i.e. schizophrenia, PTSD or whatever the case may be.

    We cannot rule drugs out altogether. There are life-threatening situations that require a drug of one form or another....type one diabetes, kidney failure......the list goes on and on.

    Maybe we need more education when it comes to mental illnesses and the side effects associated with psychotic drugs, not to mention the possible effects of dug interactions.

    ETA: There are a few good doctors out there, but there's also a lot of quacks!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163084].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Originally Posted by waterotter View Post

      The exact reason that I suggested regular follow-up appointments should be mandated.



      As I mentioned, seeing a "qualified" doctor, be it a Psychologist or Psychiatrist. By this, I meant a doctor that specializes in whatever field is required, i.e. schizophrenia, PTSD or whatever the case may be.

      We cannot rule drugs out altogether. There are life-threatening situations that require a drug of one form or another....type one diabetes, kidney failure......the list goes on and on.

      Maybe we need more education when it comes to mental illnesses and the side effects associated with psychotic drugs, not to mention the possible effects of dug interactions.

      ETA: There are a few good doctors out there, but there's also a lot of quacks!
      I think many doctors are well meaning. If people understood the college curriculum that doctors have - what the actual education is that they get, they'd watch their own health a lot closer. Also - doctors choose the drugs they give via drug company marketing, and that should be understood by people taking the drugs. You're getting that drug because of marketing and the pharm industries own private studies, not because your doctor is some sort of god that knows everything.

      There's also doctors that aren't as well meaning as we want to believe they are. That prick that had me on an experimental drug for my asthma when I was a kid made my life hell -- but he had my parents scared that I'd die without their drugs and info about medical sham wasn't as available then. They believed anything doctors told them. That mistake killed my mother. I escaped, but had to leave the country to find out what was going on.

      Suzanne. I don't think that's the original documentary that I watched, I watched it before I posted it, though, and it's spot on. It doesn't matter what source info comes from.........a statist believes what they are told by the state. As far as big pharma - they are the state. Period.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9163879].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
        Banned
        Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

        Suzanne. I don't think that's the original documentary that I watched, I watched it before I posted it, though, and it's spot on. It doesn't matter what source info comes from.........a statist believes what they are told by the state. As far as big pharma - they are the state. Period.
        I wouldn't waste 2 minutes of my time watching Scientology propaganda. Big Pharma is undoubtedly in the biz for the money. Do you know any business that isn't in the business for the money, including the Charlatan with the fake degrees, Popper, in that video. The alternative, "wellness", just eat good food to cure everything bunch is getting rich selling 'wellness' and their supplements, which are notorious for being worthless... and of course, anyone who thinks Scientology is a non-profit, is deluded.

        I take ZERO pills daily. At my age, most people are popping enough pills daily that they need to put them in little boxes to keep track of them all. I took Prozac years ago for 6 months and it pulled me out of a deep depression. I'm glad it was available, but I'm also happy not to be dependent on any medications.

        We live in a pill popping world. The customers are quite willing participants. They love, want and demand their pills. They see them advertised on TV and run to their doctor to get some. They can't wait to try out the latest, greatest buzz. People love their altered reality. That's the average Joe Schmoe customer that probably doesn't have a whole lot going on medically, but can study symptoms and knows what to tell doctors to get them to prescribe their drug of choice. Funny, the people who rail against psychoactives and probably smoking psychoactives, but it's OK because they didn't get it from Big Pharma. They get it from their local drug dealer instead.

        Then there are the real patients with real problems that are both serious and deadly, such as schizophrenia, clinical depression, and a whole host of mental disorders. To say that medications do not help these people is to disregard all evidence that they do. Thousands are helped by these medications and there is a higher risk of mentally ill people committing crimes when substance abuse is involved, and substance abuse is more likely to be a factor when mental illness goes untreated. The patients treat themselves with pretty devastating results.

        So undoubtedly, you and I will never agree on medications prescribed for people who actually do need them rather than for people who just want a buzz or young people for who they are treated with them off label. Antidepressants and many psych drugs were not created, and warn on the label that they are not for people below a certain age, and yet young people somehow end up with them. Perhaps Drs. should be held accountable legally if they prescribe medications that aren't intended for the age group that they're prescribing for.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164165].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Max Anderson
    Originally Posted by thunderbird View Post

    Nearly Every Mass Shooting In The Last 20 Years Shares One Thing In Common, And It Isn't Weapons
    "The overwhelming evidence points to the signal largest common factor in all of these incidents is the fact that all of the perpetrators were either actively taking powerful psychotropic drugs or had been at some point in the immediate past before they committed their crimes."
    ... I am also quite sure that they also all drank water at some point in their life.

    Point is, you canĀ“t draw any conclusion from that.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9164029].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    The next video IS from the NRA, but it does NOT give opinion on guns or mention parties. What it DOES show is how things are going and WHY people are concerned I could mention cases like Richard Jewell ALL DAY LONG.

    For those that don't know, or remember, Richard Jewell, a white american with a differential manner and southern drawl, found a backpack filled with explosives, and got everyone out of harms way, before it blew up. This was at the olympics in Georgia in 1996. The FBI immediately created a profile of a middle eastern terrorist trying to scare the country and hurt the olympics!

    After a while, news reports indicated that Jewell "fit the profile". He was NOT middle eastern, and didn't fit THE profile at all!!!!!!!!! But he fit "the profile". That is to say that the FBI created a profile to fit HIM of a middle aged person that lives at home. He had nails also. HECK I had that type of nail, and still do. Anyway, he tried to sue to get something for his life being destroyed. One company dragged him through the courts and then claimed they were right because the case was dropped after jewell died.

    Anyway, ENJOY:


    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9165328].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Assault is an action - not a "thing". People who assault others will do so no matter what they do or don't have in their hand. Guns are only one means of killing. More people are stabbed to death than shot. Yet nobody is out finding out whether those people are on psycho drugs or not. You'd think that would be being studied. The fact that it's not is what I look at as grounds for calling the whole issue an "agenda". People are poisoned, beaten, drowned, suffocated. If there's loonies out there that want to kill, they will.

    Whatever we want to think about the situation - it is true that the news making shooters are on psychotropic drugs. That's the fact. Everything else is speculation and opinion.

    Take it how you will. Just keep your hands off my 2nd amendment.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9168687].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      Assault is an action - not a "thing". People who assault others will do so no matter what they do or don't have in their hand. Guns are only one means of killing. More people are stabbed to death than shot. Yet nobody is out finding out whether those people are on psycho drugs or not. You'd think that would be being studied. The fact that it's not is what I look at as grounds for calling the whole issue an "agenda". People are poisoned, beaten, drowned, suffocated. If there's loonies out there that wants to kill, they will.

      Whatever we want to think about the situation - it is true that the news making shooters are on psychotropic drugs. That's the fact. Everything else is speculation and opinion.

      Take it how you will. Just keep your hands off my 2nd amendment.
      You're right on all counts, of course, but if you DARE to call any weapon an assault weapon, let it be a REAL automatic. HECK, a number of people using automatics really don't see the point in aiming, and end up doing more damage anyway. I bet nobody else looked at my link. Nice site. It shows that bans have INCREASED gun violence, criminals have decided to not commit crime because they may be on "the wrong side of a gun", and more fatal, AND non fatal, accidents happen with things OTHER than GUNS!

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9168825].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    I dunno, Steve. I guess our gov, despite all the corruption, is just really special. They are completely unlike every other government that has banned arms in their country then massacred millions on millions of their own citizens. Nope - can't happen here. Every other country that it happened in was just completely different and it had nothing to do with the fact that people that get huge enough amounts of power enough to disarm a nation are usually sociopathic. We're just too freakin' special for that one.

    I got to go get some popcorn made so I'll be ready for the next armed militia to attack a citizen on our soil over a financial dispute, so I can cheer when they slaughter him instead of just going to court. It's nice to be special, in a special country with a special government.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9169839].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    It IS interesting how you talk about want people to be able to own something akin to a derringer, and people say you are nuts for wanting people to have nukes!

    BTW I am REAL curious! I never heard this claim that I was being a fear monger on this until now, and TODAY, a person spoke in a video about how now #$%^&* have this as a talking point. Interesting coincidence! You know, you even MENTIONING things such as you are is akin to SCREAMING that such fears ARE founded!! THINK ABOUT IT!

    Basically, you are going to one extreme to belittle a point. You speak of how such things should be limited more than they are, though in some places they are, or were, outlawed. You distort terminology and facts. I mean if I just listened to the likes of you, I would think these guns were highly imprecise, utterly lethal, and could shoot 200+ rounds per minute. They are precise, often NOT lethal, and you would often have to struggle to get 60 rounds off in a minute. HECK, shooting ranges may balk if you tried to shoot 2 shots in less than 2 seconds! Seriously, one guy DID complain to me! But if you hold the trigger, they only shoot ONE shot!

    But HEY, if you are all willing to sign a public petition to ask that gun ownership should be freely allowed, and make it clear that that is your position, on all the forums, GREAT! We can get along! I then agree with you!

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9170934].message }}

Trending Topics