School/Mass shootings are now part of our culture.

Should the goal of the authors of that entry have been to mislead, they wouldn't have been contributors to the kind of work in which that chapter is found.

Comparing the literature we have both offered, I think that our respective definitions of evidence in a scientific subject are so very different that advancement of dialogue would be scarcely possible.
LOL...okay!
 
So I read the report, it's heavily misleading IMHO. They are addressing "server" dignosed mental disorders and not mental health as a whole. Not sure if that some sort of a save face attempt for the psychiatric community or what, but I would call it fluff peice.

Antidepressants Are a Prescription for Mass Shootings | Citizens Commission on Human Rights, CCHR


So the question I have, is if all these people are not suffering from mental health problems, why is the psychiatric community prescribing them medications such as antidepressants?

Either we mentally healthy people being doped with psycho active drug's, or we have mentally ill people being doped with psycho active drug's and allowed to run around in public. Either or, it's a fucking problem that needs to be addressed.

I know this is kind of arguing against my own position, but you know that's a Scientology group, right?
 
I know this is kind of arguing against my own position, but you know that's a Scientology group, right?

Considering I've personally experienced antidepressant reactions on par with clinical psychopathy (and thankfully recognized and subsequently DX'ed said meds and went back to being "normal), the source may be questionable but the statements do have some credit to them. We really don't know what we don't even know with regards to brain chemistry, hence why treatment ends up being a frigging guessing game with what might work, and then just play Battleship with pills until you find what supposedly works, damn the side effects.
 
Considering I've personally experienced antidepressant reactions on par with clinical psychopathy (and thankfully recognized and subsequently DX'ed said meds and went back to being "normal), the source may be questionable but the statements do have some credit to them. We really don't know what we don't even know with regards to brain chemistry, hence why treatment ends up being a frigging guessing game with what might work, and then just play Battleship with pills until you find what supposedly works, damn the side effects.

Re: Scientology, I'm just saying use caution (read: exercise extreme skepticism) in interpreting their opinions. The data on the active shooters they list and their medication usage is easily verifiable...but just like the Gipper said, you gotta verify it.

I completely agree with you regarding the pharmacology of antidepressants. Take Welbutrin, for example. The package insert clearly says the mechanism of action is not understood. That means that while we can observe a positive clinical effect in some people i.e. no longer depressed, it also means it can be (and often is) doing other things that may be undesirable.
 
Last edited:
I don’t point fingers at local LE. Just the Feeble Band of Idiots that run the FBI.
There is a solution. Teach your children well. The worse I ever saw in school was a fight after. Chirping then fist ta cuffs. If I EVER got in trouble(if caught😉) I got my ass BEAT. But my youth is a story in its self...🗿

FBI has foiled a number of terror attacks, so I’m OK with what some of what the FBI is doing. Regardless of that, teaching your kids well is an individual family skill or tasking based on what you think ”well” is. The way our children are raised in America will never be a monitored issue; meaning we can't legislate how children are raised family to family, so that discussion is irrelevant.

So if family raising principals can't be dictated or enforced, why is it still part of the discussion? The issue of family raising (IMO) has changed because we can't make decisions on our own (most Americans). The first thing most Americans do is open their phones, is see what their "friends" are saying on Facebook, and make a decision based off that. It’s really crazy.

It simply goes back to the discussion of mental health issues. Neither of those two issues that play such an important roll in these shootings are fixable. Unless you have individual family monitors placed in homes that dictate how you raise your kids. How else does it happen? Mental health is the same argument. Unless you're going to lock up all the crazies, it’s an unsolvable issue.

My next course of action would be actually doing something. Besides just talking among one another about what we argue is the problem (insert Army Problem Solving Guide #6), how can we impact the issue? Using mental health as an example: how would you solve it? I just think we’re spending too much time identifying and arguing about what the problems are (mostly we’re arguing about whose opinion is correct, honestly) and we’re not taking any action to fix it. How can we as veterans and like minded individuals solve the problem? If the solution isn't arming teachers (I am working on that project for our district), taking away guns, mandatory family monitors inserted into homes, locking up the crazies, or changing medication prescribed by Doctors what can we do?


School Shooting Flow Chart.png
 
Last edited:
Well in fairness, it has been more than one crazy motherfucker over the years. I also never said anything about stripping everyone of their rights.

That sick cunt was able to legally buy a rifle when he still wasn't old enough to legally consume alcohol... I'm sorry but that makes zero sense to me.
The minimum age requirement to enlist in the US military and be issued an automatic weapon is 18. Should we change that as well because of one crazy?
 
The two situations are not even slightly comparable.
The psycho should have joined the military like the rest of us crazy SOBs. Instead of being a pussy and targeting unarmed children.
No offense to you guys who had a purpose other than blowing shit up. }:-)
 
On January 1st, 1901 our nation was born, it just came into existence as a nation. There was plenty of debate beforehand, but no violence. The US fought a revolution to achieve what it became and this is a fundamental difference between the two nations. The principle stance after three incidents here known as the Strathfield, Hoddle Street & Port Arthur massacres revolved around three fundamental issues: sports shooters should be licensed, those who use firearms as a tool of trade will be exempt (farmers, kangaroo shooters for example), and the general population should not have casual access to firearms.

But, as people trying to be independent of a hostel government we had to be armed to fight the revolution. Our founding fathers identified that our citizens are the most important part of the country, and should always have the right to bear arms against a new hostel government. They wrote the 2nd Amendment for that exact reason; the people are the "well regulated Militia." That phase has been argued about for a long time but, for some reason after the amendment was made, no US Governmental Office has attempted to disarm the public...
 
The mental health aspect could be used as a solution of regulating access to guns, but it couldn't be done without due process. Meaning, anyone talking to a mental health professional (probably ALL of us at some point) would have to be documented, which would have to be backed by a law and reported to some form of law enforcement agency. This would be a violation of a shit ton of laws that are already in place.

But then again, for some reason our Government can add people to the no fly list without due process. Requiring those people to petition the Government to get that right back...so sure, maybe it can work...


Suspect Allegedly Confessed To Fla. School Shootings That Killed 17

"Furr also told Morning Edition that the suspect had been a client at mental health facilities and had been expelled from the high school for disciplinary reasons."

That's "facilities", more than one. So the people involved checked the "mental health" box, didn't help..

***I edited this to include the mental health facilities quote.***
 
Last edited:
Re: Scientology, I'm just saying use caution (read: exercise extreme skepticism) in interpreting their opinions. The data on the active shooters they list and their medication usage is easily verifiable...but just like the Gipper said, you gotta verify it.
 
Last edited:
My best friend was on Abilify for years and may still be. It changed him so much I couldn't associate with him any longer.

Side effects:
Call your doctor right away if you notice any of these side effects:

Allergic reaction: Itching or hives, swelling in your face or hands, swelling or tingling in your mouth or throat, chest tightness, trouble breathing

Anxiety, irritability, nervousness, restlessness, trouble sleeping

Compulsive behavior or intense urges you cannot control

Confusion, unusual behavior, depressed mood, thoughts of hurting yourself or others

Fever, chills, cough, sore throat, body aches

Increased hunger or thirst, change in how much or how often you urinate

Jerky muscle movements you cannot control (often in your face, tongue, or jaw)

Lightheadedness, dizziness, fainting

Seizures

Sweating, uneven heartbeat, muscle stiffness

Unusual tiredness or sleepiness

If you notice these less serious side effects, talk with your doctor:

Headache

Nausea, vomiting, drooling

Unusual weight gain

If you notice other side effects that you think are caused by this medicine, tell your doctor.

Call your doctor for medical advice about side effects. You may report side effects to FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088.
 
A bit over two years ago, we had a guy presenting a "workplace violence/active shooter" seminar at work. He made an interesting comment about Seung-Hui Cho which I unfortunately didn't have the opportunity to have him substantiate. He said he laid targets flat on the ground at the range and shot them up the way a prone victim might be shot.
I ended up doing a bit more reading, including Kenneth Westhues' paper about the Virginia Tech shooting, in which he wrote:

"A related weakness of explanation in terms of Cho's allegedly murderous character is that there is no evidence of it prior to the time of the murders. Cho had no record of violence. On account of his extreme reserve, mental-health professionals had assessed him as early as 1998, when he was 14, and as late as 2005, when he was 21. None of the experts diagnosed homicidal tendencies.

It was only after Cho committed his murders that observers discerned in him a murderous personal identity. This is like calling a substance dynamite after it explodes. If it could not be recognized as dynamite earlier, it may well have been something else, maybe a benign substance like garden fertilizer, sawdust, or ripening fruit, that detonated under an unusual combination of specific conditions."

... And I thought, how many people knew ammonium nitrate from Miracle Gro before 1995?
 
But, as people trying to be independent of a hostel government we had to be armed to fight the revolution. Our founding fathers identified that our citizens are the most important part of the country, and should always have the right to bear arms against a new hostel government. They wrote the 2nd Amendment for that exact reason; the people are the "well regulated Militia." That phase has been argued about for a long time but, for some reason after the amendment was made, no US Governmental Office has attempted to disarm the public...

Yes, I’m aware of the 2nd Amendment, which is the difference between our two constitutions, as discussed. We have not been disarmed, the requirements on ownership have been tightened and in fact legal ownership has been growing here, much to the hysteria of our Greens Party.
 
Yes, I’m aware of the 2nd Amendment, which is the difference between our two constitutions, as discussed. We have not been disarmed, the requirements on ownership have been tightened and in fact legal ownership has been growing here, much to the hysteria of our Greens Party.


I hope my reply didn’t come off as rude, that certainly wasn’t the intention. It’s impressive to me that you’re so informed on our constitution. As a typical American I know nothing of other country’s constitutions. There’s also something to be said about regular armed citizens being armed to fight off their hostel Government, especially these days; modern military might. But, Syrian citizens started a pretty successful uprising, started being the key phrase. Until mother Russia started “fighting ISIS” in the region.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That applies to individuals. As in the police do not have a duty to protect individuals. They still have a duty to protect the public at large. In that case, an individual sued the police saying that they had an obligation to protect her. The courts disagreed and said the police are only required to protect the public at large. A good attorney can argue here that he wasn't protecting just one person, but his job was to protect the entire school.

This coward failed in his state-mandated duty to act. His sole purpose for being there was to protect all of those children. I am willing to bet that he heard the sounds of gunfire, was close to retirement, and said fuck that shit. Likely the internal investigation will find him guilty of failure to react and cowardice. That's why he quit under investigation, which will stop you from getting hired anywhere else. I doubt there is any criminal charge that could be levied against him, but he can most certainly be sued civilly.
 
Back
Top