Home

Man, sounds like I should be taking what you take.

Mass killings and rampage killings went on before the meds came into public use.

They also took place when there were more mental institutions locking away the mentally ill.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_murderers_and_spree_killers_by_number_of_victims

Click on "Americas" on the list, and they have a wider view of the numbers of these incidents.

The long and short of it is that mass killings occur when some lunatic gets it in his head that killing lots of folks is what he wants to do.


It isn't guns that cause it, it isn't the drugs, nor the period in history. There are more of them now because there are simply more people on earth... and when you have more people, you increase the chances that one will be born that will fulfill what the little voices in his head tells him to do. If they didn't have a gun, they would still commit mass killings. They would use a knife, a match and gasoline, or a stolen dump truck...but they will strive to succeed in what they get in their heads they need to do.

Logic, not emotion. Good post.

Did you watch the vid I posted? It's worth the 11 minutes and is full of pros that aren't " talking out their ass again".

A lot of these suicides and mass killings were done by people being treated for relatively minor conditions. In short, they weren't fuggin crazy, until they were put on these drugs...period.

Lotta good points there B-Bar.

Gunner

There are less outlets for the psychopaths today. Throughout time man has been in a constant state of war/battle etc. It was no big deal to go into your neighboring country 200 years ago and rape, pillage etc. Good work for psychopaths and it kept them busy for centuries.

300 years ago, many of today's psychopaths were likely battlefield heroes

Or that some people are ticking timebombs.

Even true today, lots of special forces/leo types are indeed fully functioning psychos.

Gunner

Very good post. There are many people on Psychotropics who have never and will never commit a crime. Also, as was said earlier, are the killings a function of the drugs or are they a function of the crazies who happen to be on the drugs? Another allusion is the drugs themselves triggering something in a minute amount of folks. Psychotropics have helped a lot of people who otherwise would be warehoused away in some medieval institution but who with the drugs, are able to be productive members of society.

Those of us who oppose new laws know the anti's are simply using this issue to create more classes of prohibited persons who will NEVER get their gun rights back. Who here has never been depressed? When do you seek help for that depression? Some turn to psychotherapy and others turn to an MD who prescribes them an ant-depressant. Should every person who has ever sought help for depression or some other malady be forever prohibited from owning a weapon?

The whole thing is just one more issue to divide and eventually conquer gun owners by convincing simpletons that anybody who even looks a little shaky should be forever banned from owning a weapon lest the rest of us lose our rights to hunt Prairie Chickens with our 1100. It is always the person, not the tool and the person who commits a crime should be held accountable, not somebody who might commit one because they resemble somebody else who did. Typical liberal, elitist mentality.

Not so. Mass murders have been happening since the dawn of man and not just by Governments.

Sick people do sick things. Asylums had their place in society. Too bad the poor care people got in them ruined it for the rest of us...

NO grant funded or government agency or pharmaceutical company is going to spend money to prove it might be "their drug" as part of the problem. Its so much easier to blame the gun and the gun is a useful scapegoat. When they outlaw guns people will just beat each other to death or the more creative will use Machete's or swords.

I've seen what people do to each other in brazil, thailand, india and africa with machetes, not pretty, but effective nontheless.

Gunner

and that is why
1. guns need to be readily accessible
2. concealed carry needs to be widely available, and
3. "gun-free" zones need to be limited in scope and few in number.

so such a ticking time bomb can be quickly neutralized if he decides he wants to become a mass murderer. Just knowing that they might be stopped before they killed anyone, or killed very many, might be enough to deter some of the ones who are crazy but still have some ability to think through possible scenarios.

OK, then show me why a kid being 'treated' with drugs for minor ADD just snaps and shoots 10 people. Should that kid have been thrown into an asylum and the key tossed away because school simply bored the fugg out of him? That seems to be what you're advocating.

the word "stupid" works for me. It is easy to try to demonize something as a reason for irrational behavior. Wacked out people have always been with us. I am pretty sure in every case in recent times there were people that saw the wacked behavior but what process that works in dealing with them? In the older days there were simpler methods of dealing with this.
I keep going back to i think it was maltus's theory, put some rats in a cage with plenty of food and water. They will eventually reproduce to such a degree as you start witnessing abnormal behavior for them.
People are the same. It's a giant lab experiment and you are seeing the results.

Straw man, and you know it.

Several mental illnesses don't fully develop until later in life. Sometimes they develop slowly, sometimes they spurt, and so on. And yes, psychotic breaks do happen as do fugue states.

This has been well documented long before modern medication.

If someone is mentally ill, they are treated with drugs today.

The practice of treating mental illnesses in the world today is pretty much limited to use of drugs. So, I can guarantee you, if someone has signs of mental illness that are outwardly expressed and recognizable, that person WILL be on some sort of meds.

Drugs have taken the place of any physical mental treatments, and have certainly taken over where mental facilities used to keep them out of public.

It's not indicative to convince anyone that the drugs cause mass killings. It IS however indicative to reasonable state that the largest percentage of mass killers are mentally ill.

The psych evaluation for SF is very rigorous, and it's ongoing. Maybe one gets through every now and then. Maybe one turns every now and then. But to say "lots of"; sorry, that's just BS.

As for cops it's much the same. There are good cops and bad cops. There are very few whom have been proven to be psychopaths.

That's why I said "Independent Study".

It's not just the drugs, there are literally thousands if not hundreds of thousands of folks on these drugs. I believe it's a whole littany of things, changing the laws about commiting folks to the looney bin, destruction of the family through welfare, values, etc, but I see some of you already destroyed the argument about drugs as a stand-alone proposition...