School shooter in Connecticut

[Dr.Who]

I Blame the media why guns are a problem. Like The media always make you famous when you commit a horroable crime. Remember that movie theater shooting? Heres what the Media did

They made him famous

Or remember the Virgina Tech Shooter?

They made him famous

Its the Media encoraging future killers. Wanna know why Congress or our government wont restrict the media they rather punish us instead. Just l.ike the Media made the Shoe Bomber famous

Now we all suffer

Lets see? You are saying that in this most recent case we have a disturbed young man with no connection to the school where his rampage took place and that he just may have gotten the idea to go to a school because - well, because it did not just pop into his brain - because he saw the media coverage of other mass murders? Does that mean that if the other, previous mass murders, had taken a different form, if they had all been in industrial parks, that then he would have chosen to go to an industrial park instead of a school? That if the past stories that were covered had all used arsenic as the weapon of choice that he would have chosen arsenic? So highly publicized media coverage of arsenic in the industrial park, or a pipe in the study, would have lead to different outcomes? That in fact the weapon or the location are unimportant details in the story? The real story is where he got his ideas and what made him think his ideas deserved to be acted upon

 

[Rafael Norma]

@BarackObama sólo controla sus lágrimas

1.- Fast & Furious operation:

2.- you reap what you sow

3.- @GOP against @TheJusticeDept

4.- ALL MEASURES TAKEN:

 

[Rafael Norma]

And if the state had institutionalized said crazy son against his will, then people would be screaming about his "rights" and not the second amendment.

You are so right.

 

[ThirdTerm]

Adam's motive to kill his mother came to light and it's been reported that she was planning to commit him to a mental institution and she was petitioning the court to make it happen without his consent and she may have given up on taking care of her autistic and unstable son after home schooling him for few years.

EXCLUSIVE: Fear of being committed may have caused Connecticut gunman to snap

 

[Rafael Norma]

While #Mexico is on flames, due to drug trafficking because drug consumption in the U. S. ...

Mr. @BarakObama gets the Nobel Peace Prize

 

[cashmcall]

Invincible Ignorance


I am still checking his facts, but most hve panned out..
Thomas Sowell

Must every tragic mass shooting bring out the shrill ignorance of "gun control" advocates?

The key fallacy of so-called gun control laws is that such laws do not in fact control guns. They simply disarm law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily available.

If gun control zealots had any respect for facts, they would have discovered this long ago, because there have been too many factual studies over the years to leave any serious doubt about gun control laws being not merely futile but counterproductive.

Places and times with the strongest gun control laws have often been places and times with high murder rates. Washington, D.C., is a classic example, but just one among many.

When it comes to the rate of gun ownership, that is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but the murder rate is higher in urban areas. The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than among blacks, but the murder rate is higher among blacks. For the country as a whole, hand gun ownership doubled in the late 20th century, while the murder rate went down.

The few counter-examples offered by gun control zealots do not stand up under scrutiny. Perhaps their strongest talking point is that Britain has stronger gun control laws than the United States and lower murder rates.

But, if you look back through history, you will find that Britain has had a lower murder rate than the United States for more than two centuries-- and, for most of that time, the British had no more stringent gun control laws than the United States. Indeed, neither country had stringent gun control for most of that time.

In the middle of the 20th century, you could buy a shotgun in London with no questions asked. New York, which at that time had had the stringent Sullivan Law restricting gun ownership since 1911, still had several times the gun murder rate of London, as well as several times the London murder rate with other weapons.

Neither guns nor gun control was not the reason for the difference in murder rates. People were the difference.

Yet many of the most zealous advocates of gun control laws, on both sides of the Atlantic, have also been advocates of leniency toward criminals.

In Britain, such people have been so successful that legal gun ownership has been reduced almost to the vanishing point, while even most convicted felons in Britain are not put behind bars. The crime rate, including the rate of crimes committed with guns, is far higher in Britain now than it was back in the days when there were few restrictions on Britons buying firearms.

In 1954, there were only a dozen armed robberies in London but, by the 1990s-- after decades of ever tightening gun ownership restrictions-- there were more than a hundred times as many armed robberies.

Gun control zealots' choice of Britain for comparison with the United States has been wholly tendentious, not only because it ignored the history of the two countries, but also because it ignored other countries with stronger gun control laws than the United States, such as Russia, Brazil and Mexico. All of these countries have higher murder rates than the United States.

You could compare other sets of countries and get similar results. Gun ownership has been three times as high in Switzerland as in Germany, but the Swiss have had lower murder rates. Other countries with high rates of gun ownership and low murder rates include Israel, New Zealand, and Finland.

Guns are not the problem. People are the problem-- including people who are determined to push gun control laws, either in ignorance of the facts or in defiance of the facts.

There is innocent ignorance and there is invincible, dogmatic and self-righteous ignorance. Every tragic mass shooting seems to bring out examples of both among gun control advocates.

Some years back, there was a professor whose advocacy of gun control led him to produce a "study" that became so discredited that he resigned from his university. This column predicted at the time that this discredited study would continue to be cited by gun control advocates. But I had no idea that this would happen the very next week in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.​

 

[steveox]

Well ,,Some whacko will think if you try to kill somebody famous youll get famous too..Go see what John W Hinkley did

 

[Hobo1]

Clearly it is time to put a lot more research and development into the hand science of mental health. Today's psychiatrists do have a wide variety of medicine to treat a patient. (Pharmaceutical companies are sure to provide an amble choice of drugs) What we lack is the medical tests and machines to determine which mental illness a patient is suffering from.

I pity the poor psychiatrist who must sit and talk to a patient then make a judgement why a person is acting a little strange - and there are a lot of things that can go wrong with the brain. In the complete absence of machines like MRI, CAT scan, or even an X-ray or blood test, the doctor has to make a judgement about the illness and which medicines are most appropriate.

That's like asking a doctor to diagnose prostrate cancer simply by having a conversation with the patient. If we want to reduce the incidences of gruesome crime, then we need to put a lot more effort into learning about mental illness - and stop repeating the thousand and one ways to control guns.

 

[Cruella]

There are several mental disorders that don't manifest themselves until the late teens to mid twenties. Schizophrenia being one of them. This could be a problem for parents and professionals, especially if the person is over 18.

 

[Gipper]

Clearly it is time to put a lot more research and development into the hand science of mental health. Today's psychiatrists do have a wide variety of medicine to treat a patient. (Pharmaceutical companies are sure to provide an amble choice of drugs) What we lack is the medical tests and machines to determine which mental illness a patient is suffering from.

I pity the poor psychiatrist who must sit and talk to a patient then make a judgement why a person is acting a little strange - and there are a lot of things that can go wrong with the brain. In the complete absence of machines like MRI, CAT scan, or even an X-ray or blood test, the doctor has to make a judgement about the illness and which medicines are most appropriate.

That's like asking a doctor to diagnose prostrate cancer simply by having a conversation with the patient. If we want to reduce the incidences of gruesome crime, then we need to put a lot more effort into learning about mental illness - and stop repeating the thousand and one ways to control guns.

Good points, but I hold no pity for psychiatrists. Most of them think they are dispensing hard science. They believe they KNOW what they are doing is right. They like many MDs, are merely drug pushers.

What we need is a complete review and analysis of psychiatry and the use of psychiatric drugs.

 

[Cruella]

Good points, but I hold no pity for psychiatrists. Most of them think they are dispensing hard science. They believe they KNOW what they are doing is right. They like many MDs, are merely drug pushers.

What we need is a complete review and analysis of psychiatry and the use of psychiatric drugs.

Sometimes the problem isn't in use of psychiatric drugs, but the lack of using them. I know a woman who has a severe case of OCD. She's fine on her meds, but occasionally for reasons unkown, she thinks she can go off of them and the problems reappear to the extent of her becoming hysterical. A friend from work's mother has schizophrenia. She's also fine on her meds but she too tries to go off of them now and then and all hell breaks loose in the family when she isn't medicated.

It seems like the majority of senseless muders are committed by young adult males. I don't know how you can even begin to screen all of them.

 

[dogtowner]

Clearly it is time to put a lot more research and development into the hand science of mental health. Today's psychiatrists do have a wide variety of medicine to treat a patient. (Pharmaceutical companies are sure to provide an amble choice of drugs) What we lack is the medical tests and machines to determine which mental illness a patient is suffering from.

I pity the poor psychiatrist who must sit and talk to a patient then make a judgement why a person is acting a little strange - and there are a lot of things that can go wrong with the brain. In the complete absence of machines like MRI, CAT scan, or even an X-ray or blood test, the doctor has to make a judgement about the illness and which medicines are most appropriate.

That's like asking a doctor to diagnose prostrate cancer simply by having a conversation with the patient. If we want to reduce the incidences of gruesome crime, then we need to put a lot more effort into learning about mental illness - and stop repeating the thousand and one ways to control guns.

medicine is only good if its in ones system.

but you are correct that there can be some trial and error involved.

this particular lunatic was a known problem though. this is not all moms fault

 

[Openmind]

There are several mental disorders that don't manifest themselves until the late teens to mid twenties. Schizophrenia being one of them. This could be a problem for parents and professionals, especially if the person is over 18.

You are absolutely correct.
Glad to be able to agree with you on something.

And, even when teenager or younger children show symptoms of schizophrenia, psychiatrists are reluctant to place this label on them because it may be a temporary mental health condition influenced by hormonal changes rather than the full blown schizophrenia. and they do not want to stigmatized young children or teenager with this damning label. Also, children and teenagers do not react to psychotropic drugs the same way as adults do, so it is very difficult to provide an appropriate medication regiment.

 

[dogtowner]

You are absolutely correct.
Glad to be able to agree with you on something.

And, even when teenager or younger children show symptoms of schizophrenia, psychiatrists are reluctant to place this label on them because it may be a temporary mental health condition influenced by hormonal changes rather than the full blown schizophrenia. and they do not want to stigmatized young children or teenager with this damning label. Also, children and teenagers do not react to psychotropic drugs the same way as adults do, so it is very difficult to provide an appropriate medication regiment.

so lying is an appropriate response while education is not worth the bother ?

sounds like an avoidance of accountability to me.

 

[Rafael Norma]

Remember when you ran away​

And I got on my knees and begged​

You not to leave​

Because I'd go berserk?​

​

You left me anyhow and then​

The days got worse and worse​

And now you see I've gone​

Completely out of my mind.​

​

And​

​

They're coming to take me away, Ha-ha​

They're coming to take me away, Ho-ho​

Hee-hee-haa-haa​

To the funny farm​

Where life is beautiful all the time​

And I'll be happy to see those​

Nice young men in their clean white coats and​

They're coming to take me away, ha-ha! (x 2)​

You thought it was a joke​

and so you laughed, you laughed,​

when I had said that losing you​

would make me flip my lid.​

Right?​

You know you laughed​

I heard you laugh​

You laughed, you laughed​

and laughed and then you left but​

Now you know I'm utterly mad​

​

And..and...and....​

​

They're coming to take me away, Ha-ha​

They're coming to take me away, Ho-ho​

Hee-hee-haa-haa​

To the funny farm​

Where life is beautiful all the time​

​

[/COLOR]​

​

​

​