Gun bill gets shot down by panel

[Nagishkaw 510]

How about blaming the culture of prescribing anti-depressants, which can have often bad effects on people's ability to reason.

Seems like in this country if you're feeling a bit blue you get prescribed a concoction of mind altering drugs at the drop of a hat. The shooter was on such medication, I think that seriously needs to be looked into as a maybe not a motive, but an enabler of such violent behaviour.

Give the kid lots of ritalin that way they can focus on school and retain information better. Hehehe. Ritalin have given users the mental ability of a servant temporarily.

Why don't you take a massive amount and tell us if it really works? This could be as close as you get to paradise without being blinded by light and deafened by the music of cruising 'Peurto' Ricans in your neighbourhood ... Unless you are still too agitated to notice the obvious escape route.

[almaty 19]

How about blaming the culture of prescribing anti-depressants, which can have often bad effects on people's ability to reason.

Seems like in this country if you're feeling a bit blue you get prescribed a concoction of mind altering drugs at the drop of a hat. The shooter was on such medication, I think that seriously needs to be looked into as a maybe not a motive, but an enabler of such violent behaviour.

Give the kid lots of ritalin that way they can focus on school and retain information better. Hehehe. Ritalin have given users the mental ability of a servant temporarily.

Why don't you take a massive amount and tell us if it really works? This could be as close as you get to paradise without being blinded by light and deafened by the music of cruising 'Peurto' Ricans in your neighbourhood ... Unless you are still too agitated to notice the obvious escape route.

pwned...good job sister

[Nagishkaw 510]

Thanks, Brother.

[Niels Bohr 72]

LOL

I know better. I'm above those levels. I prefer focusing my energy on making life better than hurting life.

[almaty 19]

LOL

I know better. I'm above those levels. I prefer focusing my energy on making life better than hurting life.

better living through chemistry eh brother?

[Nagishkaw 510]

I know that, and you know that, but what you have to do now is prove it to the rest of the forum. Example : Show them a Rosetta Stone packed with secrets about your future, and offer a way for them to decode it.

[DeadPoolX 9]

How about blaming the culture of prescribing anti-depressants, which can have often bad effects on people's ability to reason.

Seems like in this country if you're feeling a bit blue you get prescribed a concoction of mind altering drugs at the drop of a hat. The shooter was on such medication, I think that seriously needs to be looked into as a maybe not a motive, but an enabler of such violent behaviour.

There are a number of different medications used to treat depression (i.e. SSRIs, MAOIs, Tricyclics, Benzodiazepines, etc), and unfortunately, the media tends to center in on only a few (i.e. Paxil, Prozac, Celexa, and a few other very well-known types) and naturally focuses on the bad while ignoring the good they do.

There are a lot of people who require psychiatric medication. Can it be overprescribed? Absolutely. But more often than not, psychiatrists are pretty damn careful about what they prescribe and how much to their patients. Many of these drugs, if not monitored closely, have the potential for some serious side-effects. If for no other reason, the psychiatrist in question would want to watch his or her patients to cover their own rear-end (in order to prevent a lawsuit) and reputation.

I've often found that a person's reasoning ability depends on the individual and their ailment. For instance, if someone has schizophrenia, then chances are they aren't reasoning too well to begin with. Once they are on their medication (and actually taking it, as psychiatric patients have a tendancy to not take their medication), their reasoning abilities quickly grow. Can some psychiatric medication cloud one's thinking? Yes, it can. But every drug affects every person differently, with some side-effects being more common among the populace (as whole) than others.

Overall, however, I think that psychiatric medication, while sometimes potentially risky (some medications do have some nasty side-effects), can improve a person's lifestyle dramatically. So I think it's wrong to lay the blame squarely on psychiatric medication, just as it's wrong to purely blame television, video games, comic books, movies, or any other convienent scapegoat.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

LOL

I know better. I'm above those levels. I prefer focusing my energy on making life better than hurting life.

better living through chemistry eh brother?

Recreationally at least.

[slim 1,525]

For all the "less guns equals less gun deaths" people out there, riddle me this:

How do we get rid of all the guns?

The fact of the matter is, it would be IMPOSSIBLE to rid the U.S. of guns. Therefore, we will have guns, and subsequently, we will have gun deaths. It is unavoidable.

What is avoidable though, is having large-scale killing sprees because the most effective deterrent to armed persons going crazy is other armed persons shooting them dead. (Or the implied shooting them part, in which case they usually shoot themselves dead.) More guns does not equal less gun death. However, more guns in the hands of trained and certified persons (those with Concealed Carry Permits, etc.) does equal less gun death.

Just about anyone over 21 without a felony record can legally purchase a handgun here in the U.S. with little or no training. Just go to the gunshop and buy a gun. Those who are certified through programs like a Concealed Carry class to carry that weapon have far more training and knowledge of the law, and even those who go through a program like a gun safety course (provided by an organization like the NRA) are educated on the most important thing when it comes to guns.... guns can kill people, and killing people has consequences.

Those who are distraught over a break up, or are depressed or sad, mentally unstable, etc., even without guns, they're going to find a way to kill the person they want to kill. Should we outlaw matches because someone burnt down a hotel? Maybe we should outlaw cars because someone got drunk and killed a pregnant woman. That's preposterous. We would never outlaw those things. It just doesn't make sense. So, that's why I must ask, why is it that when there's a shooting, or something happens involving a gun, people immediately say that guns are the reason these people died, not the fact that a mentally unstable person perpetrated a violent act? Why do we think we can cause society's problems to go away by taking away the means, and not the causes? Too much crime in the inner-city? Let's add more cops! Let's not add schools and jobs... let's bust more criminals! That'll show them. Too much teen pregnancy and subsequent welfare-causing-more-welfare? Let's put them in section 8 public housing neighborhoods, that way they won't come to our neighborhood.

Come on people. America has problems. Our problems are not solved by letting the cops take care of all the bad people and banning all the bad stuff. Well, at least not when they come to your neighborhood. It's easy to say we don't need guns when nobody is shooting at you. When you live in the suburbs and don't have to worry about crime and being victimized, your Louisville Slugger in the garage is all you need. Well, that is until someone brings a gun to your neighborhood, to your house, into your perfect crime free, suburban life... or you child's classroom.

Now, if anyone can come up with a plausible scenario in which ILLEGAL firearms would be confiscated and destroyed BEFORE (or simultaneously with) LEGAL firearms, I'm all ears.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Wise words Slim.

[Nagishkaw 510]

Amen.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think you can separate incidents like VA from general rank & file violent crime. It stands to reason that if this guy did not have access to deadly weapons he would not have been able to rack up a double digit bodycount.

Sure - he might have found other ways to commit harm, knifing a girl or a hammer attack - but in the end hand-to-hand violence which relies a lot more on size and physical strength doesn't wipe out as many people as a 75lb weakling with a semi-automatic pistol and 100 rounds of ammunition. Frankly - everything about this case is obscene - including the fact that this exact incident has happened numerous times and people seem to be unable unwilling to see the correlation that these sorts of rampages, as crimes of opportunity by desperate and angry people are facilitated directly by the relatively easy availability of tools to carry out mass murder. What's frightening is that this will happen again and again and again - just as it happened in the Amish school last year, Columbine 6 years before that and as happens every single year in this country. Yet still people don't get wise.

As I said elsewhere Firearms turn a potentially lethal situation into a definitely lethal one, and act to place fast and "easy solutions" in to the hands of people unable to deal with problem situations. Moreover, the idea of glorifying violence as some sort of social necessity (a view which is facilitated by a media which generally celebrates violence as a form of entertainment) is frankly appalling.

[Fandango 1,439]

For all the "less guns equals less gun deaths" people out there, riddle me this:

How do we get rid of all the guns?

The fact of the matter is, it would be IMPOSSIBLE to rid the U.S. of guns. Therefore, we will have guns, and subsequently, we will have gun deaths. It is unavoidable.

What is avoidable though, is having large-scale killing sprees because the most effective deterrent to armed persons going crazy is other armed persons shooting them dead. (Or the implied shooting them part, in which case they usually shoot themselves dead.) More guns does not equal less gun death. However, more guns in the hands of trained and certified persons (those with Concealed Carry Permits, etc.) does equal less gun death.

Just about anyone over 21 without a felony record can legally purchase a handgun here in the U.S. with little or no training. Just go to the gunshop and buy a gun. Those who are certified through programs like a Concealed Carry class to carry that weapon have far more training and knowledge of the law, and even those who go through a program like a gun safety course (provided by an organization like the NRA) are educated on the most important thing when it comes to guns.... guns can kill people, and killing people has consequences.

Those who are distraught over a break up, or are depressed or sad, mentally unstable, etc., even without guns, they're going to find a way to kill the person they want to kill. Should we outlaw matches because someone burnt down a hotel? Maybe we should outlaw cars because someone got drunk and killed a pregnant woman. That's preposterous. We would never outlaw those things. It just doesn't make sense. So, that's why I must ask, why is it that when there's a shooting, or something happens involving a gun, people immediately say that guns are the reason these people died, not the fact that a mentally unstable person perpetrated a violent act? Why do we think we can cause society's problems to go away by taking away the means, and not the causes? Too much crime in the inner-city? Let's add more cops! Let's not add schools and jobs... let's bust more criminals! That'll show them. Too much teen pregnancy and subsequent welfare-causing-more-welfare? Let's put them in section 8 public housing neighborhoods, that way they won't come to our neighborhood.

Come on people. America has problems. Our problems are not solved by letting the cops take care of all the bad people and banning all the bad stuff. Well, at least not when they come to your neighborhood. It's easy to say we don't need guns when nobody is shooting at you. When you live in the suburbs and don't have to worry about crime and being victimized, your Louisville Slugger in the garage is all you need. Well, that is until someone brings a gun to your neighborhood, to your house, into your perfect crime free, suburban life... or you child's classroom.

Now, if anyone can come up with a plausible scenario in which ILLEGAL firearms would be confiscated and destroyed BEFORE (or simultaneously with) LEGAL firearms, I'm all ears.

Excellent post. And the bit in red is a top notch question that no one will answer because it's impossible.