Another School Shooting

[Doc]

Sometimes it's the only way to get an unbiased opinion that is not aimed at supporting predetermined assumptions organized to create a snappy, attention-getting news article.

[virgil]

Did you read your own article, aside from the ranking part? The study quoted stated that one of the primary issues with our system is the lack of consistent insurance coverage, a problem that it says is being addresses by the new ACA that so many of the members here are so fond of.

[Elmo]

Read post #21 up on top.

 

But let me get this straight.  You have one group claiming school shootings is a gun control issue.  You have another group saving it's not a gun control issue but rather a mental health issue.  And you guys are saying US has the best coverage in the world...in other words, you're saying mental health is not the issue.  So what are you saying?

[Doc]

It occurs to me that you can have the best mental health care system in the world and still be inadequate to prevent all loony's from "losing it" and going postal.

 

But is it a gun control issue? It seems to me that after decades of annually piling on volume after volume of new gun restrictions and now having the mass slayings increasing, perhaps it is time to understand that doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results may be a bit insane in itself. Maybe it's time to crawl out of that box and start looking at other solutions. Perhaps those solutions lie in the mental health system, or even some other social area that we have not explored yet.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Read post #21 up on top.

 

But let me get this straight.  You have one group claiming school shootings is a gun control issue.  You have another group saving it's not a gun control issue but rather a mental health issue.  And you guys are saying US has the best coverage in the world...in other words, you're saying mental health is not the issue.  So what are you saying?

Best care in the world? Yes. access and affordability is the issue. A large part of it is legal fees and suits as well as the red tape they run into bringing new products and procedures to the market. I see the main issue as, the vast majority of our representation is from the legal field and have no interest in reforming that portion of our system. They are also very very fond of red tape and more regulations to justify their existence.

[Mr VJP]

It's not a gun issue.  Sometimes insurance pays for things the patients shouldn't be getting at all!

 

http://prepperchimp.com/2014/06/17/nearly-every-mass-shooting-in-the-last-20-years-shares-one-thing-in-common-and-it-isnt-weapons/

[virgil]

Well, if PrepperChimp.com says it's not a gun issue, that's good enough for me.

[Mr VJP]

Of course, Virgil brings nothing to the debate as usual, other than some snide remark.  Why don't you read the article and try to offer something constructive to the debate for once?  Tell me what's in the article you don't believe is a fact.

 

Or perhaps you want the debate focused on firearms and the eventual confiscation of them?

 

BTW, that was simply a reprint from World Truth TV......

 

http://worldtruth.tv/nearly-every-mass-shooting-in-the-last-20-years-shares-one-thing-in-common-and-it-isnt-weapons/

 

Maybe you like them better, but I doubt it.  Makes no difference to me what the source is if the facts are correct.  The Main Stream Media is currently the most dishonest source of information Americans can view.

 

 

 

Edited June 19, 2014 by Mr VJP

[virgil]

The article is an opinion piece.  The opinion is that the issue is not a gun issue.  You agree with that opinion and then take that to mean that it is a fact.  All of your posted articles are the same.  You just don't know the difference between an opinion that you like, and an actual fact.  I've never advocated for the confiscation of firearms- that's a fact.  See the difference?

[Mr VJP]

It is a fact that all of these mass shooters were using psychotropic drugs.  The article gives you all of the specific facts on the drug use by each shooter.  It is a fact that is the common link in all of these cases.  All of the facts are listed in the article.  To say the connection between the two is mere opinion is to deny the obvious, which is what the anti-gun crowd is doing and then misdirecting the public's attention to gun control as the answer.

 

By denying the fact there is a common element in the use of these drugs and mass shootings, you are helping them get away with their misdirection, thereby helping them perpetuate the lie that the problem is firearms in our hands.  That is the opinion of the anti-gun crowd, which you do not seem to be challenging.  I am.  See the point?

 

Maybe another "opinion" piece on the subject might help you see it.

 

http://www.cchrint.org/2014/05/26/will-lawmakers-investigate-elliot-rodgers-psychiatric-drug-use-or-ignore-it-that-is-the-question/

 

 

[virgil]

Based on your purported educational resume, you're surely familiar with the phrase 'correlation does not prove causation', right?  How can you hinge your argument on the fact that mental illness was a factor in most of these cases, but deny that guns were involved in all of them?  That's the kind of 'logic' that makes the general public think that gun rights advocates are looney tunes.

[Mr VJP]

Because the murders committed by psycho drug using mentally ill people without using firearms are just not reported and sensationalized by the media to advance an agenda.

 

BTW, my point is NOT that the mentally ill were the problem.  The psychotropic drugs prescribed were.

 

Millions of firearms, and firearms owners, did NOT commit any murders in any of those years.  Therefore the firearms are obviously not the problem.

 

The abuse of a Constitutional right by a few individuals to cause harm, is not a justification to repeal that Constitutional right from ALL of the people.  If you don't think requiring our elected officials to look into the psycho drugs prescribed to these killers is just as important as their desire to ban firearms in civilian hands, you are no friend of the 2nd Amendment.

 

Edited June 20, 2014 by Mr VJP

[virgil]

Antipsychotic drugs are an imperfect science.  Yet, there are millions of prescriptions written each year, with a relatively small number of patients committing violent acts.  The AMA and the FDA as well as the entire pharmaceutical industry are constantly trying to come up with better meds.

[Elmo]

In the article you posted, it quoted Elliot Rodgers as saying that "if the police don't kill him, the mixture of drugs will".  That meant that he was completely coherent when he wrote it and he was fully intent on killing a bunch of people before he took the drugs.

 

I think drugs come into play on a few of these shootings not so much as a cause but the shooter took them to give them sort of a boost.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Elmo

[Mr VJP]

Elmo, these drugs are not drugs that get you "high".  They are mind altering drugs.  People on them are completely lucid and in control of their bodies.  It's what these drugs do to their mind that makes them dangerous. 

 

BTW, all of the shooters listed in the article, including Rodgers, were on very powerful psycho drugs for some time prior to going off.  Rodgers knew an overdose would kill him, as would any drug, but they didn't make him feel more powerful or invincible.  They don't act like alcohol or cocaine and give you drive or beer muscles.

 

Allowing these drugs to be prescribed by any therapist or physician without close scrutiny and regulation, is going to cause many more of these mass shootings.  And if you take their guns, they'll resort to other methods, like gasoline or vehicles.  Rodgers used a knife and a car in his attacks too.  In countries where guns are not available, people on powerful psych meds still kill lots of people, without using guns.  There is a connection, but American research grants are not pushing to look into it.

 

[jjb4900]

yup, the only thing new that has any relationship to these shootings is a combination of mental illness and the drugs prescribed to control it (with a few exceptions)..........guns have been around forever and so has bullying and whatever else is blamed as the cause, there is something else that's pushing these kids to do these type of things.

[Doc]

yup, the only thing new that has any relationship to these shootings is a combination of mental illness and the drugs prescribed to control it (with a few exceptions)..........guns have been around forever and so has bullying and whatever else is blamed as the cause, there is something else that's pushing these kids to do these type of things.

You're right! While everyone is running around looking for the quick fix, there is something very insidious going on culturally and socially. It's all a whole lot more complicated than I think most people realize or are willing to accept. It appears to be a social evolution toward violence with a flair for shock and notoriety. It has nothing to do with clip size or evil connotations of firearm appearances. My big concern is while all these people are running around seeking "feel-good" easy fixes, the stealth causes are continuing to morph into more and more evil and monstrous events. We are still worrying about how a gun looks, while the next generation of horrors may involve bombs and who the heck knows what all.

[Mr VJP]

Finally someone is asking the right questions in this land.  But will any elected hack answer them truthfully?

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/cnn-commentator-nails-it-as-chicago-council-smashes-thumbs