At least 27 die in school shooting in Connecticut | 1

[Endovelico]

No matter how much one tries to ridicule the rising concern in respect of guns, the fact is that fire weapons allow for more people being killed. One can kill with knives, swords, bayonets, clubs, bows and arrows, stones, and even with one's bare hands. But not as efficiently and in as great numbers as with fire weapons. Just compare the number of casualties in any battle in the Middle Ages with casualties in any modern military campaign. Banning the possession of fire guns by civilians will necessarily decrease the number of people being murdered. Trying to prevent such a ban in the name of a "right" to bear arms, is ridiculous. Justifying arms possession as a means to resist oppression is even more ridiculous in a country which meekly accepted the Patriot Act and all sorts of violation of privacy. Preserving the right to bear arms is as ridiculous as preserving the right to dueling. Indeed one could argue that the authorities are incapable of preserving a person's honour, and therefore dueling is the only way to preserve that right...

[noddy]

stridency in the face of reality .. who is guilty of it i does wonder.

for the record, im only "pro gun" on the same levels im "pro gay marriage" or "pro legal drugs" .. not being gay or a gun fan or a drug user its not my political fight, barring the principles involved... guns bore me and i have no interest or use in them, i would only do so if i manage to get myself more rural and i need to get rid of feral pest animals.

and the dry boring fact from my perspective mr endo is that you better show me some figures from countries that banned guns and then had the murder rate drop.. without those its all just emotional opinions due to the personal dislike of them and it reminds me of puritan christians babbling on about alcohol or sex.

fwiw, in australia the murder rate did not change due to the gun ban.

[noddy]

Doc please, the amount of homicides caused by people who have not had any contact with SSRI's would suggest that as a control group the SSRI's had either little or no effect on the behavior of those who take them. You can't have your data both ways

Right. Now I know what you don't believe.

Lets take a step back then. Do you believe there are any problems with these drugs at all?

You have a group of individuals whom are known to suffer from any number of mental health issues. Some of these individuals take drugs that are within the SSRI drug family and you have others who suffer from mental health difficulties and do not take an SSRI drug.

Which one is more likely to commit a homicide ? Is there a significant difference in the homicide rates of either group? What causes someone to commit a homicide that is not already within either group? Are those murders committed by people who are suffering from mental illness but have not been diagnosed? Is a person who would commit a homicide considered within the normal or healthy range of acceptable mental health? That's what I am asking

We could also look at the incidence of mass murder before and after these drugs. Correlation not being causation and all of that, but this is a dangerous and difficult to study application of our current methods, since one could easily dismiss them as being troubled individuals in the first place. But it seems to me that school shootings really started happening after kids started getting prescribed powerful chemicals for normal childhood issues.

Exactly. There may be another cause present. But the number one suspect is use of these drugs. As you say it is very easy to write it off by the killers are troubled individuals in the first place. But that still does not explain the epidemic of mass schools killings in the last couple of decades that did not happen before that.

I think that anyone who looks for singular causes for human behavior is an durian. But I know a guy who blew his brains out with a revolver, where it made no sense at all. He was prescribed some anti-psychotic and the last thing anyone had heard him say was a rant about how all of his artistic creativity was gone, and that without it, he had nothing.

agreed.

my andecdotal experience with the dark side of humans, which during some periods of my life was quite intensive leaves me with the impression that the only really bad cases of "dead in the eyes" psychotic behaviour was people struggling with prozac and "wild in the eyes" psycho was typically amphetamine related.. in both cases i saw many examples of behaviour that wouldnt leave me confident about those people in a room full of kids or with themselves, depending on personality type because some people explode inwards and others outwards.

i wouldnt change the law based on my experiences but i would like for more study and stats on the bad outcomes for prozac type things, your example of the creativity death, "dead inside" was also quite strong in the bad outcomes i saw.

wild in the eyes isnt always amphetamines, some people come with it naturally and easy to trigger, however ive always hated amphetamine based drugs for what they did to people in my world, i really hate them in a way i cant muster for anything else... fun, smart types being turned into shallow violent husks of themselves.

[Typhoon]

NRA: "Israel only stopped school shootings by putting armed security guards in their schools."

Israel: "Yeah, about that."

NY Daily News | Israelis shoot down NRA's claim that the Jewish State uses more weapons to keep schools safe

In recent years, restrictions on gun ownership in Israel have been tightened, not relaxed.

[Simple Minded]

my andecdotal experience with the dark side of humans, which during some periods of my life was quite intensive leaves me with the impression that the only really bad cases of "dead in the eyes" psychotic behaviour was people struggling with prozac.......

Interesting observation, especially in light of Doc's opinion that a lot of this started with mass marketing of these drugs for children in the 1990s. Seems to me it was about the early 1990s that my wife started to comment on how many children seemed "glassy eyed." Her description was that they seemed like they had no souls, and coined the term "Little Voids" to describe them.

We always speculated whether it was the drugs or simply the result of living insulated lives.

[Endovelico]

stridency in the face of reality .. who is guilty of it i does wonder.

for the record, im only "pro gun" on the same levels im "pro gay marriage" or "pro legal drugs" .. not being gay or a gun fan or a drug user its not my political fight, barring the principles involved... guns bore me and i have no interest or use in them, i would only do so if i manage to get myself more rural and i need to get rid of feral pest animals.

and the dry boring fact from my perspective mr endo is that you better show me some figures from countries that banned guns and then had the murder rate drop.. without those its all just emotional opinions due to the personal dislike of them and it reminds me of puritan christians babbling on about alcohol or sex.

fwiw, in australia the murder rate did not change due to the gun ban.

I wonder how many people had guns in Australia, prior to your gun ban, or how many guns existed per 1,000 people. I also wonder how many - or what percentage of - murders were committed with guns in Australia, after that gun ban. Maybe the problem wasn't with the gun ban, but its lack of effectiveness. Pursuing that ban with a bit more rigour might do the trick. One has to have a very weird intellect to think that many guns or few guns will not make any difference on the number of shooting incidents...

[Simple Minded]

Banning the possession of fire guns by civilians will necessarily decrease the number of people being murdered. ...

True, but only in the sense of banning Volkswagens will reduce the number of people who are accidently killed in Volkswagen accidents.

My favorite dinner party gun violence question to ask of a pro-gun banner is "Tomorrow morning you decide to quit your job and become a human predator. There are two jurisdictions near your home. In one, the local govt has made it extremely difficult for citizens to own firearms and hunting is unpopular. In the the local govt has made it extremely easy for citizens to own firearms and hunting is very popular. In which jurisdiction are you going to practice your new trade?

Trying to prevent such a ban in the name of a "right" to bear arms, is ridiculous. Justifying arms possession as a means to resist oppression is even more ridiculous in a country which meekly accepted the Patriot Act and all sorts of violation of privacy. Preserving the right to bear arms is as ridiculous as preserving the right to dueling. Indeed one could argue that the authorities are incapable of preserving a person's honour, and therefore dueling is the only way to preserve that right...

Since the ban on drugs and alcohol has worked so well in the US, and since their is no gun violence in Mexico where guns are banned........ why not?

For a nation overrun with lawyers, and constantly concerned about "social costs," I think a legislation that gave both parties involved in a dispute to option of settling in court or via a duel would be a great idea. The weapon of choice would not have to be lethal, would be chosen via agreement by both participants, guns, swords, tazers, paint ball guns, boxing gloves, lazer tag guns and vests, etc. Would make great TV, and probably be a source of great revenue for the govt while promoting "social justice." Promoting "social justice...." that is always a good idea, right?

Lets do it for the children!

The issue of gun violence seems no different than other issues. The people who promote the idea of "the government oughta do somethin" are the people who have no interest or personal costs in the issue. "As long as it does not affect my lifestyle, I am all in favor of others sacrificing more" seems to be the battle cry of modern man.

[monster_gardener]

No matter how much one tries to ridicule the rising concern in respect of guns, the fact is that fire weapons allow for more people being killed. One can kill with knives, swords, bayonets, clubs, bows and arrows, stones, and even with one's bare hands. But not as efficiently and in as great numbers as with fire weapons. Just compare the number of casualties in any battle in the Middle Ages with casualties in any modern military campaign. Banning the possession of fire guns by civilians will necessarily decrease the number of people being murdered. Trying to prevent such a ban in the name of a "right" to bear arms, is ridiculous. Justifying arms possession as a means to resist oppression is even more ridiculous in a country which meekly accepted the Patriot Act and all sorts of violation of privacy. Preserving the right to bear arms is as ridiculous as preserving the right to dueling. Indeed one could argue that the authorities are incapable of preserving a person's honour, and therefore dueling is the only way to preserve that right...

Thank you Very Much for your post, Endo.

Perhaps Portuguese are a Pack of Pacifistic Paladins

But we Mongrel Uz are not.........

If there was another big Earthquake in Lisbon, Perhaps the Portuguese Paladins would keep queue and not Riot, Rob, Rape and Murder........

It's a bit dicier with Uz Mongrel Cowboyz and Cowgrrlz........

I remember one time when the lights went out and it was a Big Block Party in the summer heat...

I remember another when it turned into looting time.....

I especially remember When the Witch Wind Katrina turned Many Monkeys of Chaos in New Orleans into Killer Ape Zombies.......

Some Police included........

What works for Pacifistic Portuguese Paladins may not work with American Uz......*


Good Luck with your Pacific Portugal........

Portugal has been lucky.........

I wonder what might have happened if a disarmed Portugal had become a Province of the Third Reich........

Given the way that Portugal forced the Jews to convert and intermarry with the Gentile Portuguese to the point that 1in 5 is part Jewish

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

AIUI the German Wolves were a bit annoyed about not getting the Wolframite they Wanted..... Quite Willing they Were to Sink you.........

The like would have been bad for Uz too........

Despicable Dolph supposedly liked the Amerindians but considered the rest of Uz to be half Jew and half Negro/Black Mongrelz

But at least we might have killed more more of those Orcish German Euroz

Who I understand you don't like very much anyway.........

Even though they agree with you about gun control..........

More than we Uz do..........



And by the way, I did oppose the Patriot Act........

[Simple Minded]

One has to have a very weird intellect to think that many guns or few guns will not make any difference on the number of shooting incidents...

Or one can simply access historical data: http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Cr ... 0226493636

Regarding the dinner party question earlier, I have never heard any person in favor of gun banning answer that they would practice preying on those in the jurisdiction where the probability is higher that their potential prey may be armed.

IIRC, gun control laws originated in the US to keep guns out of the hands of blacks post Civil War. Course, we also don't want them damn weak women to start feelin they is equal to us men either.......

Individuals with equal power eventually demand (and usually achieve) equal rights.

Still fascinates me, the idea of 'I perceive no need of gun ownership in my neighborhood/life, therefore for "the good of society" (not really for "the good of society" but REALLY in order to shape society according to my perceived/imaginary standards), I think there should be no gun ownership in neighborhoods/lives of which I have no knowledge.'

Discussion is fun, but to deny others who may have experienced the need of defending one's self from violence.... seems to be counter to the assumed motive of compassion, at least to my Simple Mind.

[Demon of Undoing]

The casualty count in pre-firearm vs post- firearm warfare is explainable almost entirely in terms of three operative elements. One, pre- war was almost always fought in much smaller size battling elements. Look at the number of soldiers involved in the largest battles of the day- say Cannae- no more than about 140k troops were involved on both sides. This didn't even equal a medium sized skirmish in 1951 Korea. Two, and this should interest you, Endo, there was no analogue to artillery, not even when speaking of Roman direct support weapons. Three, and this is the big one, firearms allow active fighting to go on for days and weeks and months, long after sword and shield, and the man wielding it, would have been physically destroyed.

I submit to you that none of these conditions are relevant to the discussion at hand.

In light of the fact that even a total American ban on firearms, which would not yield the results intended, would not eliminate the hundreds of millions of guns that exist here, we need to treat the items not as evil ghosts, but as fire. Every responsible adult knows how to fight a fire. Little children are taught how to escape them, how to check doors for heat, and how to crawl under the smoke. I heard one so-sweet young teacher on NPR tell us that she wasn't going to accept responsibility of owning, carrying and training with a gun, that she wasn't paid to get into a firefight. I guess then she can currently consider herself paid to be a helpless casualty and possibly watch her students become such.

Those brave teachers at Sandy Hook that confronted that bastard and paid for it with their lives, I wonder weather they would have wished in their last moments to be properly armed. It is not realistically in our power to take away the threat posed by the evil and insane. It is in our power to equalize a bit the odds

[noddy]

stridency in the face of reality .. who is guilty of it i does wonder.

for the record, im only "pro gun" on the same levels im "pro gay marriage" or "pro legal drugs" .. not being gay or a gun fan or a drug user its not my political fight, barring the principles involved... guns bore me and i have no interest or use in them, i would only do so if i manage to get myself more rural and i need to get rid of feral pest animals.

and the dry boring fact from my perspective mr endo is that you better show me some figures from countries that banned guns and then had the murder rate drop.. without those its all just emotional opinions due to the personal dislike of them and it reminds me of puritan christians babbling on about alcohol or sex.

fwiw, in australia the murder rate did not change due to the gun ban.

I wonder how many people had guns in Australia, prior to your gun ban, or how many guns existed per 1,000 people. I also wonder how many - or what percentage of - murders were committed with guns in Australia, after that gun ban. Maybe the problem wasn't with the gun ban, but its lack of effectiveness. Pursuing that ban with a bit more rigour might do the trick. One has to have a very weird intellect to think that many guns or few guns will not make any difference on the number of shooting incidents...

ok, its about guns, whatever..and you only want to discuss it about how obvious it is that guns make killing easier, just like its obvious gays are wrong and obvious alcohol is wrong and obvious sensible people have no need for such things... i know you might not agree with those things i added but lots of people do and the rational human looks beyond their emotional response. or so i was lead to believe.

murder rate and suicde rate stayed the same, gun murder and gun suicide went down, i posted the graphs on a previous page.

the people that do want to kill eachother do want to kill eachother and dont stop because lack of guns make it harder - typically its angry spouses or drug deals gone bad or related underworld nonsense, the usual reasons humans kill.

we had a bad mass murder in tasmania were a loner guy shot up a cafe and this triggered the gun ban, we havent had one since and this is championed by the anti gun lobby but we didnt really have one before either.. so its a statistical anomoly to me.

this whole mindspace of banning everything in case it saves one life somewhere is a nightmare to me, i have little time for fear worshippers who want the world reduced to a padded cell for their own insanity.

for you personally it might stop at guns, for society in general, it stops at nothing, everything is up for banning at any time if someone dies from it.

[monster_gardener]

One has to have a very weird intellect to think that many guns or few guns will not make any difference on the number of shooting incidents...

Or one can simply access historical data: http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Cr ... 0226493636

Regarding the dinner party question earlier, I have never heard any person in favor of gun banning answer that they would practice preying on those in the jurisdiction where the probability is higher that their potential prey may be armed.

IIRC, gun control laws originated in the US to keep guns out of the hands of blacks post Civil War. Course, we also don't want them damn weak women to start feelin they is equal to us men either.......

Individuals with equal power eventually demand (and usually achieve) equal rights.

Still fascinates me, the idea of 'I perceive no need of gun ownership in my neighborhood/life, therefore for "the good of society" (not really for "the good of society" but REALLY in order to shape society according to my perceived/imaginary standards), I think there should be no gun ownership in neighborhoods/lives of which I have no knowledge.'

Discussion is fun, but to deny others who may have experienced the need of defending one's self from violence.... seems to be counter to the assumed motive of compassion, at least to my Simple Mind.

Thank You VERY MUCH for your post, Simple Minded.

EXCELLENT Post!

Seconded.

[monster_gardener]

The casualty count in pre-firearm vs post- firearm warfare is explainable almost entirely in terms of three operative elements. One, pre- war was almost always fought in much smaller size battling elements. Look at the number of soldiers involved in the largest battles of the day- say Cannae- no more than about 140k troops were involved on both sides. This didn't even equal a medium sized skirmish in 1951 Korea. Two, and this should interest you, Endo, there was no analogue to artillery, not even when speaking of Roman direct support weapons. Three, and this is the big one, firearms allow active fighting to go on for days and weeks and months, long after sword and shield, and the man wielding it, would have been physically destroyed.

I submit to you that none of these conditions are relevant to the discussion at hand.

In light of the fact that even a total American ban on firearms, which would not yield the results intended, would not eliminate the hundreds of millions of guns that exist here, we need to treat the items not as evil ghosts, but as fire. Every responsible adult knows how to fight a fire. Little children are taught how to escape them, how to check doors for heat, and how to crawl under the smoke. I heard one so-sweet young teacher on NPR tell us that she wasn't going to accept responsibility of owning, carrying and training with a gun, that she wasn't paid to get into a firefight. I guess then she can currently consider herself paid to be a helpless casualty and possibly watch her students become such.

Those brave teachers at Sandy Hook that confronted that bastard and paid for it with their lives, I wonder weather they would have wished in their last moments to be properly armed. It is not realistically in our power to take away the threat posed by the evil and insane. It is in our power to equalize a bit the odds

Thank You VERY MUCH for your Post, Bezerk Savant Demon of Undoing.

Those brave teachers at Sandy Hook that confronted that bastard and paid for it with their lives, I wonder weather they would have wished in their last moments to be properly armed. It is not realistically in our power to take away the threat posed by the evil and insane. It is in our power to equalize a bit the odds

Seconded. EXCELLENT Post.

It is in our power to equalize a bit the odds

Seconded.

At least it is worth trying.......

That is the importance of Sam Colt.........

He Made Men More or Less Equal ......... WoMen too *


*Note that I said "More or Less Equal".........

Not everyone can do this......... I'm not sure I can.........

J78J-6PbhVo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J78J-6PbhVo

[YMix]

Still fascinates me, the idea of 'I perceive no need of gun ownership in my neighborhood/life, therefore for "the good of society" (not really for "the good of society" but REALLY in order to shape society according to my perceived/imaginary standards), I think there should be no gun ownership in neighborhoods/lives of which I have no knowledge.'

You mean people preach to one another based on their limited experience? The way you've been recommending a rural US-style of self-reliance to European city dwellers? Shocking!

Discussion is fun, but to deny others who may have experienced the need of defending one's self from violence.... seems to be counter to the assumed motive of compassion, at least to my Simple Mind.

Fundamental culture clash detected. Luckily you and Endovelico don't really understand each other.

[Huxley]

John T. Reed, "On guns and magazines"

Banning large-capacity magazines is almost identical in logic and probable effectiveness to banning 32-ounce soft drinks by prohibiting those that are more than 16 ounces. If you limit magazines to ten rounds, those who want to be able to shoot 20 rounds will get two-ten round magazines. ...

... What is the difference between the semi-automatic handgun and the assault rifle? Nothing worth discussing. Military ones have a selector switch that enables them to fire on automatic (machine gun). They have a longer barrel so they are probably more accurate than a handgun at greater distances. Liberals are now talking about banning large-capacity magazines and civilian assault rifles which have no selector switch. They are just showing their ignorance of the weapons. In a school or theater or mall, a semi-automatic hand gun and 10-round magazine would have pretty much the same effect as a civilian assault rifle with a 20-round magazine in the hand of a shooter who practiced rapid firing and rapid changing of magazines.

[Simple Minded]

Still fascinates me, the idea of 'I perceive no need of gun ownership in my neighborhood/life, therefore for "the good of society" (not really for "the good of society" but REALLY in order to shape society according to my perceived/imaginary standards), I think there should be no gun ownership in neighborhoods/lives of which I have no knowledge.'

You mean people preach to one another based on their limited experience? The way you've been recommending a rural US-style of self-reliance to European city dwellers? Shocking!.

C'mon now YMix, I think your misinterpretation is due to you "reading into" rather than actually reading my posts. People often assume more information than is present. I never once advocated European urban dwellers adopting American rural culture, but I have often said that many problems that most people think are ubiquitous, simply do not exist in large swathes of the world. Therefore, some of us neither need nor want your solutions imposed upon us, "for our own good."

I think the silliest posters are those who talk about the right, the left, European culture, American culture, etc. Seems to me that culture changes drastically in just a few miles (or a few hundred yards) or just a few years (sometimes even a few months). Still waiting for somone to define American culture or European culture......

Discussion is fun, but to deny others who may have experienced the need of defending one's self from violence.... seems to be counter to the assumed motive of compassion, at least to my Simple Mind.

Fundamental culture clash detected. Luckily you and Endovelico don't really understand each other.

I have no doubt that Endovelico and I live on different ideological planets, but why would you think that it is a good thing that we do not understand each other? Does Endovelico own a gun? Should I be afraid?

[YMix]

C'mon now YMix, I think your misinterpretation is due to you "reading into" rather than actually reading my posts. People often assume more information than is present. I never once advocated European urban dwellers adopting American rural culture, but I have often said that many problems that most people think are ubiquitous, simply do not exist in large swathes of the world. Therefore, some of us neither need nor want your solutions imposed upon us, "for our own good."

You're preaching in general to the forum. I assumed it was aimed at everybody. Next time, use proper labeling.

I have no doubt that Endovelico and I live on different ideological planets, but why would you think that it is a good thing that we do not understand each other? Does Endovelico own a gun? Should I be afraid?

You are already afraid, whether he owns a gun or not.

[Hoosiernorm]

Maybe we should get a "I'm gonna blow your F*cking head off!" emoticon

Just to have the level of certainty that is required

[Enki]

John T. Reed, "On guns and magazines"

Banning large-capacity magazines is almost identical in logic and probable effectiveness to banning 32-ounce soft drinks by prohibiting those that are more than 16 ounces. If you limit magazines to ten rounds, those who want to be able to shoot 20 rounds will get two-ten round magazines. ...

... What is the difference between the semi-automatic handgun and the assault rifle? Nothing worth discussing. Military ones have a selector switch that enables them to fire on automatic (machine gun). They have a longer barrel so they are probably more accurate than a handgun at greater distances. Liberals are now talking about banning large-capacity magazines and civilian assault rifles which have no selector switch. They are just showing their ignorance of the weapons. In a school or theater or mall, a semi-automatic hand gun and 10-round magazine would have pretty much the same effect as a civilian assault rifle with a 20-round magazine in the hand of a shooter who practiced rapid firing and rapid changing of magazines.

Funny how he rebuts his own comment in the very beginning of his list.

2. Your ability to shoot as often as needed during the fight is crucial to your survival. Trying to defend yourself against a guy with a semi-automatic handgun with a ten-round magazine when you only have a six-shooter revolver and neither of you has additional ammo is not likely to end well for you.

[Typhoon]

As far as I know there has never been a clinical study of these meds and their effects on children. Never. Anyone want to volunteer their kids for such a study?

In every case where the facts are known about anti-depressive(most likely SSRIs) usage, 66 do far, they were present. Medical privacy laws in a number of cases have prevent whether they were involved, or not, from being made public.
http://ssristories.com/index.php?p=school

• What Drug Date Where Additional
  School Shooting Prozac WITHDRAWAL 2008-02-15 Illinois ** 6 Dead: 15 Wounded: Perpetrator Was in Withdrawal from Med & Acting Erratically
  School Shooting Prozac Antidepressant 2005-03-24 Minnesota **10 Dead: 7 Wounded: Dosage Increased One Week before Rampage
  School Shooting Paxil [Seroxat] Antidepressant 2001-03-10 Pennsylvania **14 Year Old GIRL Shoots & Wounds Classmate at Catholic School
  School Shooting Zoloft Antidepressant & ADHD Med 2011-07-11 Alabama **14 Year Old Kills Fellow Middle School Student
  School Shooting Zoloft Antidepressant 1995-10-12 South Carolina **15 Year Old Shoots Two Teachers, Killing One: Then Kills Himself
  School Shooting Med For Depression 2009-03-13 Germany **16 Dead Including Shooter: Antidepressant Use: Shooter in Treatment For Depression
  School Hostage Situation Med For Depression 2010-12-15 France **17 Year Old with Sword Holds 20 Children & Teacher Hostage
  School Shooting Plot Med For Depression WITHDRAWAL 2008-08-28 Texas **18 Year Old Plots a Columbine School Attack
  School Shooting Anafranil Antidepressant 1988-05-20 Illinois **29 Year Old WOMAN Kills One Child: Wounds Five: Kills Self
  School Shooting Luvox/Zoloft Antidepressants 1999-04-20 Colorado **COLUMBINE: 15 Dead: 24 Wounded
  School Stabbings Antidepressants 2001-06-09 Japan **Eight Dead: 15 Wounded: Assailant Had Taken 10 Times his Normal Dose of Depression Med
  School Shooting Prozac Antidepressant WITHDRAWAL 1998-05-21 Oregon **Four Dead: Twenty Injured
  School Stabbing Med For Depression 2011-10-25 Washington **Girl, 15, Stabs Two Girls in School Restroom: 1 Is In Critical Condition
  School Shooting Antidepressant 2006-09-30 Colorado **Man Assaults Girls: Kills One & Self
  School Machete Attack Med for Depression 2001-09-26 Pennsylvania **Man Attacks 11 Children & 3 Teachers at Elementary School
  School Shooting Related Luvox 1993-07-23 Florida **Man Commits Murder During Clinical Trial for Luvox: Same Drug as in COLUMBINE: Never Reported
  School Hostage Situation Cymbalta Antidepressant WITHDRAWAL 2009-11-09 New York **Man With Gun Inside School Holds Principal Hostage
  School Shooting Antidepressants 1992-09-20 Texas **Man, Angry Over Daughter's Report Card, Shoots 14 Rounds inside Elementary School
  School Shooting SSRI 2010-02-19 Finland **On Sept. 23, 2008 a Finnish Student Shot & Killed 9 Students Before Killing Himself
  School Shooting Threat Med for Depression* 2004-10-19 New Jersey **Over-Medicated Teen Brings Loaded Handguns to School
  School Shooting Antidepressant? 2007-04-18 Virginia **Possible SSRI Use: 33 Dead at Virginia Tech
  School Shooting Antidepressant? 2002-01-17 Virginia **Possible SSRI Withdrawal Mania: 3 Dead at Law School
  School Incident/Bizarre Zoloft* 2010-08-22 Australia **School Counselor Exhibits Bizarre Behavior: Became Manic On Zoloft
  School/Assault Antidepressant 2009-11-04 California **School Custodian Assaults Student & Principal: Had Manic Reaction From Depression Med
  School Shooting Prozac Antidepressant 1992-01-30 Michigan **School Teacher Shoots & Kills His Superintendent at School
  School Shooting Threats Celexa Antidepressant 2010-01-25 Virginia **Senior in High School Theatens to Kill 4 Classmates: Facebook Involved: Bail Denied
  School Violence/Murder Antidepressants* 1998-05-04 New York **Sheriff's Deputy Shoots his Wife in an Elementary School
  School Knifing/Murder Meds For Depression & ADHD 2010-04-28 Massachusetts **Sixteen Year Old Kills 15 Year Old in High School Bathroom in Sept. 2009
  School Stabbing Wellbutrin 2006-12-04 Indiana **Stabbing by 17 Year Old At High School: Charged with Attempted Murder
  School Threat Antidepressants 2007-04-23 Mississippi **Student Arrested for Making School Threat Over Internet
  School Suspension Lexapro Antidepressant 2007-07-28 Arkansas **Student Has 11 Incidents with Police During his 16 Months on Lexapro
  School Shooting Antidepressant WITHDRAWAL 2007-11-07 Finland **Student Kills 8: Wounds 10: Kills Self: High School in Finland
  School Shooting Paxil [Seroxat] Antidepressant 2004-02-09 New York **Student Shoots Teacher in Leg at School
  School Threat Prozac Antidepressant 2008-01-25 Washington **Student Takes Loaded Shotgun & 3 Rifles to School Parking Lot: Plans Suicide
  School Shooting Plot Med For Depression 1998-12-01 Wisconsin **Teen Accused of Plotting to Gun Down Students at School
  School/Assault Zoloft Antidepressant 2006-02-15 Tennessee **Teen Attacks Teacher at School
  School Shooting Threat Antidepressant 1999-04-16 Idaho **Teen Fires Gun in School
  School Hostage Situation Paxil & Effexor Antidepressants 2001-04-15 Washington **Teen Holds Classmates Hostage with a Gun
  School Hostage Situation Antidepressant WITHDRAWAL 2006-11-28 North Carolina **Teen Holds Teacher & Student Hostage with Gun
  School Knife Attack Med for Depression 2006-12-06 Indiana **Teen Knife Attacks Fellow Student
  School Massacre Plot Prozac Withdrawal 2011-02-23 Virginia **Teen Sentenced to 12 Years in Prison For Columbine Style Plot
  School Shooting Celexa & Effexor Antidepressants 2001-04-19 California **Teen Shoots at Classmates in School
  School Shooting Celexa Antidepressant 2006-08-30 North Carolina **Teen Shoots at Two Students: Kills his Father: Celexa Found Among his Personal Effects
  School Shooting Meds For Depression & ADHD 2011-03-18 South Carolina **Teen Shoots School Official: Pipe Bombs Found in Backpack
  School Shooting Threat Antidepressant 2003-05-31 Michigan **Teen Threatens School Shooting: Charge is Terrorism
  School Stand-Off Zoloft Antidepressant 1998-04-13 Idaho **Teen [14 Years Old] in School Holds Police At Bay: Fires Shots
  School Shooting Antidepressant WITHDRAWAL 2007-10-12 Ohio **Teen [14 Years Old] School Shooter Possibly on Antidepressants or In Withdrawal
  School Threat Antidepressants 2008-03-20 Indiana **Teen [16 Years Old] Brings Gun to School: There Is a Lockdown
  School Suicide/Lockdown Med For Depression 2008-02-20 Idaho **Teen [16 Years Old] Kills Self at High School: Lockdown by Police
  School Threats Prozac Antidepressant 1999-10-19 Florida **Teen [16 Years Old] Threatens Classmates With Knife & Fake Explosives
  School Stabbing Med For Depression 2008-02-29 Texas **Teen [17 Year Old GIRL] Stabs Friend & Principal at High School
  School Hostage Situation Prozac/ Paxil Antidepressants 2001-01-18 California **Teen [17 Years Old] Takes Girl Hostage at School: He is Killed by Police
  School Knife Attack Treatment For Depression & Strattera 2009-03-10 Belgium **Three Dead in School Day Care: Two Children & a Caregiver: Happened Jan 23, 2009
  School Shooting Plot Antidepressants 2009-09-22 England **Two English School Boys Plot to Blow Up High School
  School Arson Incidents Paxil 2002-04-12 Michigan **Unusual Personality Change on Paxil Caused 15 Year Old to Set Fires inside High School
  School Bomb Threat Med For Depression 2009-06-29 Australia **Vexed Father Makes Bomb Threat Against Elementary School
  School Violence Antidepressant 2005-11-19 Arizona **Violent 8 Year Old GIRL Handcuffed by Police at School
  School Violence Celexa Antidepressant 2002-01-23 Florida **Violent 8 Year-Old Boy Arrested At School
  School Threat/Lockdown Lexapro* 2008-04-18 California **Violent High School Student Shot to Death on Campus by Police
  School / Child Endangerment Antidepressants 2008-02-27 Canada **Wacky School Bus Driver Goes Berserk: Also Involved Painkillers
  School Violence Paxil 2004-10-23 Washington DC **Young Boy, 10 Year Old, Has Violent Incidents at School
  School Threat Wellbutrin Antidepressant 2007-04-24 Tennessee **Young Boy, 12, Threatens to Shoot Others at School
  School Hostage Situation Med for Depression 2006-03-09 France **Young Ex-Teacher Holds 21 Students Hostage
  School Shooting/Suicide Celexa 2002-10-07 Texas **Young Girl [13 Years Old] Kills Self at School With a Gun
  School Hostage Situation Paxil 2001-10-12 North Carolina **Young Man Holds Three People Hostage in Duke University President's Office
  School Murder Attempt Med For Depression 1995-03-04 California **Young Woman Deliberately Hits 3 Kids with Her Car at Elementary School: Laughed During Attack

. . .

An apparently long list, but it does absolutely nothing to establish causation. Nada. Zip, zero, zen zen.

The following lists are required: all combinations of the three factors

1/ diagnosed or not diagnosed with mental illness;

2/ receiving treatment or not receiving treatment with drugs;

3/ engaged or did not engage in acts of violence.

Also grouped by age, gender, etc.

First 2) All of the above were given anti-depressants of one form or another

So?

1) Presumably but not certain anyone given anti-depressant has a mental problem

This discounts the difficulty in diagnosing mental illness.

3) All of the above at least contemplated violence to the point the authorities became involved.

Lots of people contemplate violence to the point that the authorities become involved. Most are not on psychoactive drugs.

IE I don't see where your three point have any validity.

Because without it one can't do a proper valid statistical analysis.

Also I should say this. There are no studies to establish causation for various reasons.

1)As I pointed on a clinical double blind study directly relating to school violence and SSRIs is not going to happen.

No, but one can still do a retrospective analysis of the observational data.

The conclusions one can draw are weaker, but are better than supposition.

2)SSRIs have been around for decades but were not generally prescribed to children until the 1990's (which happens to be when the school violence of mass killings started.)

3)No clinical studies of the effects on children have ever been made. Mostly due to the fact that parents are simply not going to give permission for the children to be subject to medical experimentation.

See above re a retrospective analysis of the observational data

4)These drugs literally generate 100's of billions in $$$ for Big Pharma

5)There has been a provable history of Drug companies doing high abusive and illegal things to push these drugs.

6) There have even been calls for these drugs to be forcibly given to individuals deemed needing them by the authorities. When there is a history of psychiatric authorities being paid remuneration for prescribing these drugs, by the drug companies that are highly profiting by their sale.

7)There is a long history of Drugs studies showing negative or no positive effects of drugs in general being suppressed.

Perhaps. However, these are tangential issues and do nothing to either provide support for or detract from your belief.

Now I should also say that I am sure some individuals do need medication and even these drugs do help adults with mental illness cope. My primary objection here is that they are given to children, many of whom exhibit violent behavior that was pretty much unheard of prior to these drugs being widely subscribed to children. There is a most definite effect since the drugs have been generally prescribed/ Guns were widely available well previous to the violence in schools over the last two decades. Anyone not willing to at least consider the effect of these drugs is ignoring the potential original cause for the violence for politics or otherwise. There is noting rational about that.

Now you can say there is no proof of causation established but you are not addressing how causation could be established to your satisfaction.

See above.

If you can not make that statement about how causation could be established to your satisfaction, then simply saying there isn't anything established is meaningless in the face of the evidence I presented. IE I have a long list, among many many other things. You have got nothing to counter it.

By the same standard you give there is no causation established that these drugs actually help the children they are given to. Doctors prescribe these drugs to children as the experiment without any controls to establish if they actually do more good than harm.

So far what you constructed is a "just so" story based on your beliefs. It's not evidence.

Given the evidence(and there is one hell of a lot of it) of abuse by Big Pharma is pushing these drugs by paying off doctors to prescribe them(AS i recall Pfizer was levied the largest fine in history $2.3 billion for pushing its drugs illegally). As well as the huge profits made from them. The bias as far as I am concerned is against the drugs being given to children.

It is up to Big Pharma that is so highly profiting from them and the doctors that prescribe them to children to prove that they not only do no harm but that they actually help children before they are given out wholesale to children.

Perhaps, but again, these issues are tangential to the effects of the psychoactive drugs on kids.

I am skeptical of prescribing psychoactive drugs to kids, esp boys, to keep them submissive and to allow teachers to avoid their responsibilities as teachers and esp parents to avoid their responsibilities as parents.

I can construct a "just so" story that sounds equally plausible.

My story is that the suppression of natural boyish energy leads some boys to explode in an unpredictable and violent manner.

[Enki]

I tend to agree with your just so story Typhoon. I also think that building a meaningful quantitative analysis of such subjective criteria is incredibly difficult.

[Hoosiernorm]

There is exhaustive data on the patients who receive SSRI's but having that data on one side and pretty much nothing on the other side does not make a case for causation. It's sort of saying my lack of data on the non patients who take non medication proves that the patient records that record medications are equal as data pools. I don't know of any other data pool that tries to link data with non data.

[Simple Minded]

C'mon now YMix, I think your misinterpretation is due to you "reading into" rather than actually reading my posts. People often assume more information than is present. I never once advocated European urban dwellers adopting American rural culture, but I have often said that many problems that most people think are ubiquitous, simply do not exist in large swathes of the world. Therefore, some of us neither need nor want your solutions imposed upon us, "for our own good."

You're preaching in general to the forum. I assumed it was aimed at everybody. Next time, use proper labeling.

I have no doubt that Endovelico and I live on different ideological planets, but why would you think that it is a good thing that we do not understand each other? Does Endovelico own a gun? Should I be afraid?

You are already afraid, whether he owns a gun or not.

Are you really certain I am afraid. If so, afraid of what? Once again, you are reading into rather than reading.

Ignoring the two previous wise ass questions I previously posted, Seriously, why would you think it a good thing that Endovelico and I do not understand each other?

Even though there is basically zero intersection between our two spheres of existance, I think Endo and I understand each other just fine. We just have differences of opinion regarding the relationship between the state and the individual. Probably due to cultural, age, or socio-economic (hows that for a grab bag..) differences.....

Happens all the time!

[Doc]

There is exhaustive data on the patients who receive SSRI's but having that data on one side and pretty much nothing on the other side does not make a case for causation. It's sort of saying my lack of data on the non patients who take non medication proves that the patient records that record medications are equal as data pools. I don't know of any other data pool that tries to link data with non data.

I never said otherwise. Though if you walk into a room find a dead body on the floor and a man standing there with a smoking gun what is one to think? That if only guns would have been banned the dead person on the floor would still be alive?

[Demon of Undoing]

John T. Reed, "On guns and magazines"

Banning large-capacity magazines is almost identical in logic and probable effectiveness to banning 32-ounce soft drinks by prohibiting those that are more than 16 ounces. If you limit magazines to ten rounds, those who want to be able to shoot 20 rounds will get two-ten round magazines. ...

... What is the difference between the semi-automatic handgun and the assault rifle? Nothing worth discussing. Military ones have a selector switch that enables them to fire on automatic (machine gun). They have a longer barrel so they are probably more accurate than a handgun at greater distances. Liberals are now talking about banning large-capacity magazines and civilian assault rifles which have no selector switch. They are just showing their ignorance of the weapons. In a school or theater or mall, a semi-automatic hand gun and 10-round magazine would have pretty much the same effect as a civilian assault rifle with a 20-round magazine in the hand of a shooter who practiced rapid firing and rapid changing of magazines.

Funny how he rebuts his own comment in the very beginning of his list.

2. Your ability to shoot as often as needed during the fight is crucial to your survival. Trying to defend yourself against a guy with a semi-automatic handgun with a ten-round magazine when you only have a six-shooter revolver and neither of you has additional ammo is not likely to end well for you.

The 2 comment, aside from being wrong because it leaves out the intangibles which carry far more weight than simply the number of rounds available, is speaking to a different situation than the one in which he says mag size doesn't matter. Note that he says ammo availability may be critical in a gunfight. Where it matters far less is when one is not facing an active shooter but is instead gunning down innocent ( and, if the anti's have their way, comparatively helpless) victims. One may simply reload with more or less administrative ease when gunning down children and unarmed teachers.