PDA

View Full Version : Deleted Forbes Article: Psychiatric Drugs, Not A Lack Of Gun Control,-The Common Denominat




Peace Piper
01-15-2013, 06:53 AM
A Must Read for the 2nd Amendment-this is the article that somehow disappeared from Forbes website yesterday. H/T:TC

-------EXCERPTS -full article available at link----------


Psychiatric Drugs, Not A Lack Of Gun Control, Are The Common Denominator In Murderous Violence
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.forbes.com/sites/lawrencehunter/2013/01/14/psychiatric-drugs-not-a-lack-of-gun-control-are-the-common-denominator-in-murderous-violence/
Lawrence Hunter, Contributor - I write about the intersection of economics and politics.

In 2000, New York legislators recognized the ubiquitous and unambiguous connection between violence, especially gun violence and mass murder, and the widespread prescribed use of psychiatric drugs. Senate Bill 7035 was introduced in the New York State Senate that year requiring police agencies to report to the Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) on certain crimes and suicides committed by a person who is using psychiatric drugs, including assault, homicide, sex offenses, robbery offenses, firearms and other dangerous weapons offenses, kidnapping and arson. The preamble to the bill read, in part:

There is a large body of scientific research establishing a connection between violence and suicide and the use of psychotropic drugs in some cases. This research, which has been published in peer reviewed publications such as the American Journal of Psychiatry, The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and The Journal of Forensic Science, has shown, among other things, that: certain drugs can induce mania (a psychosis which can produce bizarre, grandiose and highly elaborated destructive plans, including mass murder);. . .and certain drugs can produce an acute psychotic reaction in an individual not previously psychotic....>>MORE

------------------>>SNIP<<------------------------Full Article available here (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.forbes.com/sites/lawrencehunter/2013/01/14/psychiatric-drugs-not-a-lack-of-gun-control-are-the-common-denominator-in-murderous-violence/)

Given the mass of supporting data linking psychiatric drug use/withdrawal and violence, and given the fact it has been ignored studiously by the U.S. Congress and federal agencies, it is well past time that Congress and state legislatures and government agencies at all levels formally investigate the well established link between prescribed use of psychiatric drugs, school shootings and similar acts of senseless violence.

This video reveals the indisputable connection between psychiatric drugs and violence, especially young “lone-wolf” shooters in gun massacres.

As psychiatrist Peter Breggin observes in the video:


“One of the things in the past that we’ve known about depression is that it very, very rarely leads to violence. It’s only been since the advent of these new SSRI drugs that we’ve had murderers even mass murders taking these antidepressant drugs.”

Instead of intimidating the NRA into negotiating away Americans’ Second Amendment rights through its seat at the table in Washington, the government should be demanding answers and explanations from PhRMA and the pharmaceutical companies.

Instead of extorting NRA chairman Dave Keene and NRA president Wayne LaPierre into participating with the gun snatchers’ efforts to nullify the Second Amendment in the name of reducing gun violence, why aren’t the White House and Congress putting former Business Roundtable President and current head of PhRMA, John Castellani, along with the presidents of the pharmaceutical companies on the hot seat?

Why isn’t Castellani sitting in on White House and congressional meetings about the connection between his products and mass shootings instead of Keene and LaPierre of the NRA?

Why isn’t there a White House Task Force on the connection between psychiatric drugs and violence, suicide and murder, both gun related and otherwise?

Why aren’t there congressional hearings on the connection between violence and psychiatric drugs?

Why aren’t there bills being introduced in Congress and state legislatures to tighten down on the indiscriminate, unmonitored use of these killer drugs?

Why is the government still suppressing information about the shooters’ psychiatric drug use at Sandy Hook and Virginia Tech?

Why is the government turning America into a police state in the name of protecting us against nonexistent “reefer madness” while it turns a blind eye to the real, deadly med madness created by psychiatric drugs and the uncontrollable violent rages they produce in some people?

Could it be there is a quiet conspiracy afoot among pharmaceutical companies, the government and the gun grabbers to make Mr. and Mrs. Gun Owner of America the patsies for the violence and to blame lone-wolf violence on guns rather than psychiatric drugs?

Could it be that power-hungry politicians and gun snatchers are out to exploit rare tragedies such as Sandy Hook and use the blood of innocent children to scare America into giving up its constitutional rights to own and bear arms and use them as a deterrent against tyranny?

Could it be that big pharma is today’s big tobacco?

Could it be there is an intentional effort underway in the centers of power in Washington, DC to hide the truth from the American people about the strong connection between psychiatric drugs and violence and to protect the pharmaceutical companies from civil and criminal charges for their responsibility in these heinous crimes?

------------------------------------>>SNIP<<----------FULL ARTICLE available here (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.forbes.com/sites/lawrencehunter/2013/01/14/psychiatric-drugs-not-a-lack-of-gun-control-are-the-common-denominator-in-murderous-violence/)

Could that be the explanation for why there continue to be lawsuits against gun manufacturers — not for defects in their products but rather for the misuse of their products by drug-addled individuals — and why there are few lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies for the obvious flaws in their products, which are producing violence and mayhem?

Could it be the Gun Control movement is simply a blind; just an effort by the triple alliance of left-fascists, big-government politicians and big-pharma prescription-drug dealers to dose and oppress the American people in the name of public safety, “officer safety” and social order?

The gun snatchers such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg all shamefully exploit the bloody murder of children as a pretext to nullify the Second Amendment and short arm the American public with their so-called “assault-weapons” ban and ammunition/clip restrictions. The fact is, the kinds of guns used by mass shooters are far less relevant than the kinds of drugs they were prescribed.

Why did Forbes delete this article from its website?

tod evans
01-15-2013, 07:16 AM
Why did Forbes delete this article from it's website?

Why indeed?.........:cool:

FindLiberty
01-15-2013, 07:30 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&amp;v=1XHNJyti1gE

KingNothing
01-15-2013, 08:02 AM
The percentage of people on these medications that commit mass murder is totally insignificant.
It isn't guns, it isn't video games, it isn't mental illness, it isn't movies, it isn't drugs. It's a combination of everything. We can't just scapegoat "crazy people" or medication or guns or our culture.

Peace Piper
01-15-2013, 12:14 PM
2nd Amendment Kick

This is one good argument, by Lawrence Hunter:

About Me

Lawrence Hunter is chairman of Revolution PAC. He also is president and co-founder of the Social Security Institute (along with Mike Korbey) and serves on the Advisory Board of Gold Standard 2012. Previously, he was chief economist to Jack Kemp at Empower America, former staff director of the congressional Joint Economic Committee, former vice president and chief economist of the U..S. Chamber of Commerce and former Reagan White House adviser.

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 12:21 PM
The percentage of people on these medications that commit mass murder is totally insignificant.


NO it is not insignificant when considering that every Mass Shooting involved these drugs.
It is the common denominator.

Peace Piper
01-15-2013, 12:22 PM
The percentage of people on these medications that commit mass murder is totally insignificant.
It isn't guns, it isn't video games, it isn't mental illness, it isn't movies, it isn't drugs. It's a combination of everything. We can't just scapegoat "crazy people" or medication or guns or our culture.

Feel Free to explain the combination of these simple statistics:

1. List of school shootings in the United States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States

Prior to 1989, there were only a handful of incidents in which two or more victims were killed by firearms at a school, including the 1966 University of Texas massacre, the 1974 Olean High School shooting, the 1976 California State University, Fullerton massacre, and the 1979 Cleveland Elementary School shooting (the 1927 Bath School disaster was a bombing, not a shooting, with a firearm used only to detonate explosives). School shootings prior to the late 1990s, when they received intensive press and official coverage, were considered local incidents and may be substantially underreported in current tabulations, raising questions as to whether school shootings are actually increasing or are simply receiving more attention in recent years. From 1989 to 2012, there have been at least 40 such incidents.

2. The first SSRI (New design) Antidepressant --Prozac-- was introduced in 1987
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prozac

Fluoxetine (also known by the tradenames Prozac, Sarafem, Fontex, among others) is an antidepressant of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class. Fluoxetine was first documented in 1974 by scientists from Eli Lilly and Company.[1] It was presented to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in February 1977, with Eli Lilly receiving final approval to market the drug in December 1987. Fluoxetine went off-patent in August 2001

3. Every school shooter (except apparently KY) has either been on, or withdrawing from, an antidepressant SSRI drug.
http://ssristories.com/index.php


Now what follows usually is someone says "correlation does not equal causation".

Correct.

That is why immediate examination by non involved, non partisan, non biased medical professionals must be a priority. Anything else is postponing the inevitable. There is clearly enough evidence to warrant immediate hearings.

pochy1776
01-15-2013, 12:25 PM
Feel Free to explain the combination of these simple statistics:

1. List of school shootings in the United States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States

Prior to 1989, there were only a handful of incidents in which two or more victims were killed by firearms at a school, including the 1966 University of Texas massacre, the 1974 Olean High School shooting, the 1976 California State University, Fullerton massacre, and the 1979 Cleveland Elementary School shooting (the 1927 Bath School disaster was a bombing, not a shooting, with a firearm used only to detonate explosives). School shootings prior to the late 1990s, when they received intensive press and official coverage, were considered local incidents and may be substantially underreported in current tabulations, raising questions as to whether school shootings are actually increasing or are simply receiving more attention in recent years. From 1989 to 2012, there have been at least 40 such incidents.

2. The first SSRI (New design) Antidepressant --Prozac-- was introduced in 1987
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prozac

Fluoxetine (also known by the tradenames Prozac, Sarafem, Fontex, among others) is an antidepressant of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class. Fluoxetine was first documented in 1974 by scientists from Eli Lilly and Company.[1] It was presented to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in February 1977, with Eli Lilly receiving final approval to market the drug in December 1987. Fluoxetine went off-patent in August 2001

Now what follows usually is someone says "correlation does not equal causation".

Correct.

That is why immediate examination by non involved, non partisan, non biased medical professionals must be a priority. Anything else is postponing the inevitable. There is clearly enough evidence to warrant immediate hearings.

What is the endgame of all of this "pharmageddon"

tod evans
01-15-2013, 12:29 PM
Educating the public doesn't have to equate to legislation.

The fact that John Q. doesn't know the hazards associated with most drugs is a travesty!

Drug laws need to be repealed and the public needs honest information...

What a nice fantasy..:o

Lucille
01-15-2013, 12:30 PM
NO it is not insignificant when considering that every Mass Shooting involved these drugs.
It is the common denominator.


...
That is why immediate examination by non involved, non partisan, non biased medical professionals must be a priority. Anything else is postponing the inevitable. There is clearly enough evidence to warrant immediate hearings.

This. Maybe instead of being of the defense (as we always are) we need to go on the offense and start demanding SSRIs be a major part of the national conversation on "reducing gun violence."

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 12:31 PM
What is the endgame of all of this "pharmageddon"

Social Control. Social Engineers attempting to create their version of utopia.

it has a long and sorted history.

TheGrinch
01-15-2013, 12:32 PM
Why? Because the media is just riddled with conflicts of interest, and this is just the latest example of why the media is so far removed from the 4th estate check-and-balance they were intended to be.

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 12:34 PM
"reducing gun violence."

interesting concept there.

I'll bet if we closed bases and brought our military home,, it would drastically reduce gun violence worldwide.

without pills.

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 12:35 PM
Educating the public doesn't have to equate to legislation.

The fact that John Q. doesn't know the hazards associated with most drugs is a travesty!

Drug laws need to be repealed and the public needs honest information...

What a nice fantasy..:o

Damn, out of ammo.

somebody Rep that.

Lucille
01-15-2013, 12:36 PM
Damn, out of ammo.

somebody Rep that.

Done.

TheGrinch
01-15-2013, 12:38 PM
BTW, there was already a thread literally right below this with 3 pages.

Lucille
01-15-2013, 12:39 PM
interesting concept there.

I'll bet if we closed bases and brought our military home,, it would drastically reduce gun violence worldwide.

without pills.

Yes. The mass murderer-in-chief really should start with himself (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?401364-White-House-readies-19-executive-actions-on-guns&p=4823586#post4823586).

TheGrinch
01-15-2013, 12:40 PM
The percentage of people on these medications that commit mass murder is totally insignificant.
It isn't guns, it isn't video games, it isn't mental illness, it isn't movies, it isn't drugs. It's a combination of everything. We can't just scapegoat "crazy people" or medication or guns or our culture.

Good insight, KingI'veExaminedNothingButImmediatelyDiscountAnyth ingContreversial

Zippyjuan
01-15-2013, 01:03 PM
NO it is not insignificant when considering that every Mass Shooting involved these drugs.
It is the common denominator.

It is insignificant when you have millions on such drugs which DON"T go around killing anyone. The percent of people taking them commiting such acts is incredibly small. It is also an insignificantly small percent of gun owers or people with access to guns committing them. It is also an incrediibly small percent of all people with any particular charachteristics. One post cites the emergence of such drugs after 1989. We also had few people with internet access or playing lots of graphic video games. There are so many things one could try to blame it on- many common denominators. They were all also young. They were all aslo white males. Let's ban them too.

But we have to blame something- don't we? Then we can feel good that we did "something" to try to prevent such a tragedy from happening again. We feel better. Even though it does little in reality.

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 01:10 PM
It is insignificant when you have millions on such drugs which DON"T go around killing anyone.

Do you understand the concept of Common Denominator?

Millions of Gun owners do not shoot up schools.

But every one that does is using these pills that are admittedly known to cause violent and suicidal reactions.

Zippyjuan
01-15-2013, 01:29 PM
You are right. Guns were indeed the most common denominator. Would be impossible to shoot anybody without one. On pills or not. And as I said, millions of people with guns don't go around shooting innocent people up. And there are also millions of people taking those medications who are not shooting innocent people up.

tod evans
01-15-2013, 01:31 PM
So what's it going to take to get honest, unbiased information about guns/drugs and the law in front of the populace?

TheGrinch
01-15-2013, 01:38 PM
You are right. Guns were indeed the most common denominator. Would be impossible to shoot anybody without one. On pills or not. And as I said, millions of people with guns don't go around shooting innocent people up. And there are also millions of people taking those medications who are not shooting innocent people up.

Ummm, people react to medication differently than others, so your argument is flawed.

You're absolutely right, having a gun may not be any better predictor of violence than taking a medication is that you will have a particular side effect, but it's pretty clear that there can be the potential for both with both, and when both are the common denominators, well, you decide if you want to investigate/point to the tool or the potentially behavior-altering medication.

Zippyjuan
01-15-2013, 01:49 PM
Which came first? Behavior which led to them being prescribed medicine- behavior which could have led to their actions even if they were not given any meds? Or were they peaceful, well-adjusted people and the medications changed their behivior to being psychotic? Given the large numbers of people on the meds who don't go psychotic, I am more inclined to think that the behavior came first and that the meds were not the primary cause.

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 02:55 PM
Which came first?

Oh, what an interesting question.
Social Control.
You seriously don't want to investigate that.

These drugs are, by definition, Mind Control Drugs. Their entire purpose is to alter the mind.
The people involved in their production and distribution have shown a serious lack of ethics historically.

You don't even want to investigate that. You work too hard at discouraging any investigation.
(usually citing gov approved sites as facts.)

Zippyjuan
01-15-2013, 03:26 PM
OK- it was drugs. Let's ban all drugs- especially those which could altar the mind. Including alcohol and marijuana and LSD. That will surely stop people from shooting each other and everybody will be happy again.

TheGrinch
01-15-2013, 03:30 PM
Which came first? Behavior which led to them being prescribed medicine- behavior which could have led to their actions even if they were not given any meds? Or were they peaceful, well-adjusted people and the medications changed their behivior to being psychotic? Given the large numbers of people on the meds who don't go psychotic, I am more inclined to think that the behavior came first and that the meds were not the primary cause.

I don't know, hence why it's important to investigate. Shame the media has too many conflicts of interests to allow that discussion.

And seriously, have you ever listened to the side-effects of these drugs, and then tell me with a straight face that you're positive that they had nothing to do with otherwise non-violent people turn into killing machines due to depression?

Zippyjuan
01-15-2013, 03:32 PM
Such events are too rare to find a single cause. And it is doubtful there is one cause.

TheGrinch
01-15-2013, 03:35 PM
Such events are too rare to find a single cause. And it is doubtful there is one cause.

Okay good, case closed, nothing to see here, I can see why they were right to pull any article that offers any sort of explanation. The govenrment and media know what they're doing and would never ever lie or cover up facts.

AFPVet
01-15-2013, 03:56 PM
You are right. Guns were indeed the most common denominator. Would be impossible to shoot anybody without one. On pills or not. And as I said, millions of people with guns don't go around shooting innocent people up. And there are also millions of people taking those medications who are not shooting innocent people up.

You can do much more carnage with a chainsaw... what's next?

Danan
01-15-2013, 04:02 PM
Do you understand the concept of Common Denominator?

Millions of Gun owners do not shoot up schools.

But every one that does is using these pills that are admittedly known to cause violent and suicidal reactions.

You've got to agree that people who are already depressed (and are therefore likely to take those drugs) seem to be more likely to commit such terrible actions (whether or not they actually take drugs) than those who are fine, on an emotional basis. And since depressed people are likely to take drugs and if gunmen are likely to be depressed, it's only logical that gunmen are likely to take those drugs.

People who commit mass shootings are a terrible small sample size to extrapolate anything. Every obvious correlation could be coincidence (because of the small sample size), insignificant (like the fact that most gunmen ate bread), could indicate actual causation, could mean that both phenomena are (partly) caused by the same root cause (like being depressed increases a person's likelyhood to a) take drugs and b) become a gunman), etc.

I'm not ruling out that side effects of psychotropic drugs can contribute to insane decisions. But just because most gunmen took those drugs doesn't convince me either that they are the root cause.

Brian4Liberty
01-15-2013, 04:03 PM
OK- it was drugs. Let's ban all drugs- especially those which could altar the mind. Including alcohol and marijuana and LSD. That will surely stop people from shooting each other and everybody will be happy again.

Alcohol related violence was one of the drivers for alcohol prohibition the first time around...

Danan
01-15-2013, 04:16 PM
And seriously, have you ever listened to the side-effects of these drugs, and then tell me with a straight face that you're positive that they had nothing to do with otherwise non-violent people turn into killing machines due to depression?

They are designed to alter the state of your mind in some way, so obviously it is possible that some of those shootings would not have happened had the gunmen not taken those drugs. On the other hand, they may have also prevented several shootings. There is really no way to tell.

I know someone very close to me who told me (and I was very critical of psychotropic drugs at that time) that certain drugs increased her quality of life dramatically (panic disorder, some serotonin-related drug). She told me that taking a few drops of that medicine enables her to go outside and participate in normal, social situations (like shopping, going out, etc.) without the constant, horrible fear of having a panic disorder in public. And I'm really not a position to judge that what she told me is wrong.

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 05:17 PM
OK- it was drugs. Let's ban all drugs- especially those which could altar the mind. Including alcohol and marijuana and LSD. That will surely stop people from shooting each other and everybody will be happy again.

No,, wrong approach.
Has been tried and failed miserably.

LSD has proven therapeutic uses. Long before it was tested for used in the MK ULTRA Programs. Tests which found it to be unsuitable for the goals.
Big Pharma and over 80 research institutes worked to develop other substances though.

Marijuana also has therapeutic used and some of these SSRIs may have as well,, though I am skeptical.

I would rather see the War on Drugs end as well as the Medical Monopolies.

tangent4ronpaul
01-15-2013, 05:40 PM
They are designed to alter the state of your mind in some way, so obviously it is possible that some of those shootings would not have happened had the gunmen not taken those drugs. On the other hand, they may have also prevented several shootings. There is really no way to tell.

90% of mass shooters were on these drugs. For the remaining 10%, in most if not all cases if they were on SSRI's was simply not reported. About 1 in 25 teenagers are on SSRI's.


I know someone very close to me who told me (and I was very critical of psychotropic drugs at that time) that certain drugs increased her quality of life dramatically (panic disorder, some serotonin-related drug). She told me that taking a few drops of that medicine enables her to go outside and participate in normal, social situations (like shopping, going out, etc.) without the constant, horrible fear of having a panic disorder in public. And I'm really not a position to judge that what she told me is wrong.

Sometimes the drugs help. Sometimes they make the conditions worse. But for the most part, what is being treated is not a violent condition, but the treatment sometimes triggers violent behavior in a small percentage of the population.

-t

Zippyjuan
01-15-2013, 06:30 PM
No,, wrong approach.
Has been tried and failed miserably.

LSD has proven therapeutic uses. Long before it was tested for used in the MK ULTRA Programs. Tests which found it to be unsuitable for the goals.
Big Pharma and over 80 research institutes worked to develop other substances though.

Marijuana also has therapeutic used and some of these SSRIs may have as well,, though I am skeptical.

I would rather see the War on Drugs end as well as the Medical Monopolies.

Which was actually my point. These events aren't happening because of prescription medications or guns and banning either will not prevent them from happening in the future. They are isolated cases of messed up kids.

cbrons
01-15-2013, 07:13 PM
You've got to agree that people who are already depressed (and are therefore likely to take those drugs) seem to be more likely to commit such terrible actions (whether or not they actually take drugs) than those who are fine, on an emotional basis. And since depressed people are likely to take drugs and if gunmen are likely to be depressed, it's only logical that gunmen are likely to take those drugs.

People who commit mass shootings are a terrible small sample size to extrapolate anything. Every obvious correlation could be coincidence (because of the small sample size), insignificant (like the fact that most gunmen ate bread), could indicate actual causation, could mean that both phenomena are (partly) caused by the same root cause (like being depressed increases a person's likelyhood to a) take drugs and b) become a gunman), etc.

I'm not ruling out that side effects of psychotropic drugs can contribute to insane decisions. But just because most gunmen took those drugs doesn't convince me either that they are the root cause.

How much is Big Pharma paying you?!?!?!?!

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 07:15 PM
Which was actually my point. These events aren't happening because of prescription medications or guns and banning either will not prevent them from happening in the future. They are isolated cases of messed up kids.

Shit,, I was a messed up kid. I went to school with a thousand other messed up kids..
We had guns..

None of this shit was happening.. but that was before this crap hit the population. Before ADD was invented for the Drugs to treat it.

cbrons
01-15-2013, 07:39 PM
Shit,, I was a messed up kid. I went to school with a thousand other messed up kids..
We had guns..

None of this shit was happening.. but that was before this crap hit the population. Before ADD was invented for the Drugs to treat it.

There also wasn't exceedingly violent video games and a culture that was increasingly morally relativistic.

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 07:50 PM
There also wasn't exceedingly violent video games and a culture that was increasingly morally relativistic.

Naw, we had "Combat" "The Rat patrol" and "Dark Shadows".

Violence and Murder generally have a reason. A specific reason,, sometimes called motive.

When someone with no history of violence kills for no apparent reason. (especially random and pointless killing)
It does beg questions.

cbrons
01-15-2013, 09:01 PM
Naw, we had "Combat" "The Rat patrol" and "Dark Shadows".

Violence and Murder generally have a reason. A specific reason,, sometimes called motive.

When someone with no history of violence kills for no apparent reason. (especially random and pointless killing)
It does beg questions.

Well you haven't seen videogames these days. They are much more graphic, basically murder simulation exercises. I don't think you can compare the highly pixelated games of that era to today. Ever play Hitman?

Anyway you've made it clear that you think doctors are quacks. Great, so riddle me this - how would someone of your intellectual caliber treat an individual with autism? Maybe you could tie the kid down to a gurney and stick him with needles? Trying to figure out what the new treatment protocols should be since science and allopathic medicine as an extension is all a conspiracy to enrich "BIG PHARMA" with their $10 per 90 capsules of generic Prozac.

Peace&Freedom
01-15-2013, 09:55 PM
Which was actually my point. These events aren't happening because of prescription medications or guns and banning either will not prevent them from happening in the future. They are isolated cases of messed up kids.

The salient issue, regarding the mainstream coverage of each shooting, is the lack of media discussion of the prescription drugs, irrespective of a proposed solution. Why NO widespread discussion of the drug factor, compared to the gun factor? Why is there such a thing as a 'deleted Forbes article' on such a relevant aspect of the issue?

pcosmar
01-15-2013, 10:09 PM
Well you haven't seen videogames these days. They are much more graphic, basically murder simulation exercises. I don't think you can compare the highly pixelated games of that era to today. Ever play Hitman?


Nope. I play Warcraft. I have seen some.
We had books. Well, those of us that could read. And Hollywood had movies that were graphic.
We also had the Vietnam War on TV. and even a censored as it was it was pretty graphic.


Anyway you've made it clear that you think doctors are quacks.
As far as how I would treat someone,, it would not be with mind numbing drugs.
And I never said ALL Doctors are quacks.

I said Psychiatry is Quackery.