Another Mass Shooting in Texas

 

I have no idea what the solution is.

I mean, I do: intact Families and a culture that does not promote despair and rage.

But since that is not on the table, I have no idea. Taking away guns from citizens has never been shown to work in this nation. That seems to be all that is ever proposed.

Guns have always been in the hands of the people. Mass shootings are a sign of sickness in America as much as theft of AC parts. In the great depression, people did not rob infrastructure. We are sick and dying as a society.

Not enough people believe in anything but getting what is good for themselves or in hurting others because of their pain. It is the Republic of Rome in its last days.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 233 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    What I hate most is that the ONLY solution that people seem to never think of is to pass more gun control laws.

    99% of people talking like this have no idea of what they are saying. They don’t study anything.

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Maybe we need to make mass shootings illegal?

    The ones that make the news like this are statistically nothing. Worrying about rifles is a waste of time.

    Wipeout gun free zones.

    Prosecute straw purchasers. People that knock themselves out for law school don’t want to do this, but nobody has any better ideas.

    Easier said than done, but make sure the NICS system is full. The church shooter in Texas, recently never should have been able to purchase a handgun. The Air Force didn’t fill up the NICS system. They literally added thousands of names after that incident.

    NICS is a bandaid for politicians to delay or avoid addressing the sick culture. To avoid a burden, they shift it onto law abiding citizens.

    What legislation do you recommend?

    We already have laws against murder. We need to address the sick culture. Politicians won’t do it and prefer to attack gun owners.

    In fairness, politics is downstream from culture. Politicians cannot solve this problem, though their policies contribute to the moral decay. As an example, the idea that we should help out single mothers because raising children without a father is hard seems great, but when the govt takes over a basic responsibility, people stop doing it. When a single Mom will get help, the Dad is less likely to stick around or be condemned for not sticking around because everyone knows the govt is there to help.

    The Right surrendered the culture war, and the consequences have been devastating. This is the world that David French and Ann Coulter want. One where the GOP doesn’t fight to end abortions, but rather accepts that people want to kill babies. That drag queen story hour is exactly what the Founders intended when they authored the First Amendment. Every time a politician in the GOP says that fighting the culture war will cost votes and thus it shouldn’t be fought…it leads down this path.

    Don’t forget SSM. I don’t think we get to all this gender bending confusion without the notion that men and women are indistinguishable in marriage and parenting. Meh, makes no difference how you combine them.

    • #181
  2. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Django (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    I’ve lived in Japan for decades. Japanese gun laws work because they are in Japan. They also have an annual visit by the police to verify household lists, and they have the right to enter and look about as they please.

    Thanks, but no thanks.

    I never woke up in the morning wishing I owned a gun. I never went to bed at night worrying that some randomer might decide to empty his gun in a school or shopping mall. I wouldn’t want to change that.

    Different strokes and all that. I guess you’ve never had to use a gun in self-defense?

    I now live in a state where concealed carry is considered a constitutional right; no permit needed. I never worry about someone emptying his/her gun on strangers. An armed society is a polite society because potential aggressors never know when they might attack someone who is “walking heavy”.

    I hope our state passes that but I would still recommend the NRA class. I learned a lot about state laws from the cops and lawyers who taught portions of the class.

    • #182
  3. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Don’t forget SSM. I don’t think we get to all this gender bending confusion without the notion that men and women are indistinguishable in marriage and parenting. Meh, makes no difference how you combine them.

    Reflecting back, I think that the judicial legalization of SSM was a watershed event.  

    • #183
  4. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment

     

     

    I have spent in the aggregate about 9 months in New York City. On one occasion, in the 1980s I walked up a street in the Upper East Side and entered the doorway to my accommodation. Within seconds I heard gunfire outside. It turned out a man and a woman had been shot dead. I believe the killer waited until I was off the street to carry out the attack. A friend of mine witnessed a sniper shooting around the same time. I saw guns pulled on at least one occasion – by police telling a black guy (totally innocent) to “freeze”. I don’t need to rely on media reports to know what goes on.

    As to the point of principle, I have often argued the Constitutional point with fellow Irish people who think all guns should be seized straight away.

    Our cities have the most restrictive gun laws, the least support for cops doing proactive policing, and the most crime. You would not have a similar experience in most of the U.S. a one size fits all law is not best for the US. Even the “Wild West” wasn’t as wild as portrayed on TV  but then public hangings eliminated some of the threat and deterred others from becoming killers. 

     

     

    • #184
  5. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Don’t forget SSM. I don’t think we get to all this gender bending confusion without the notion that men and women are indistinguishable in marriage and parenting. Meh, makes no difference how you combine them.

    Reflecting back, I think that the judicial legalization of SSM was a watershed event.

    The slippery slope we were told doesn’t exist.

    • #185
  6. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    If you fail to see a problem, you’re never going to solve it.

    Have you recommended how to solve it? I may have missed that.

    Because what I’ve gathered so far is you seem to be suggesting that widespread gun confiscation in America is the solution.

    First off, self defense is a human right (even the Catholic church recognizes it). And, secondly, it’s a big country with lots and lots of responsible, law abiding gun owners. Gun culture is a thing here and it isn’t about mass murder. Mass murder is a values/mental illness problem, not a gun problem.

    I hear it’s best to stay away from east London due to knife attacks. A mass murderer mowed down people in his vehicle in a Christmas parade in Waukesha in 2021. Leaving law abiding people unarmed doesn’t seem like much of a solution.

    There’s an old joke in Ireland, about the tourist slowing down his hired car and asking a local man for directions to some destination. The local man says-

    Well if I was going there, I wouldn’t start from here”

     

    Maybe everyone here (with a very few exceptions) is happy with the prevalence of guns in their society and does not see any connection between that prevalence and any mass shootings – no problem no solution necessary.

    I’m addressing the very basic point that a society without guns is a better place – in that sense- than one where they are too prevalent. It follows that I believe that working towards a reduction of guns in America would be a good thing.

    Obviously my opinion is not too popular here. I’m happy to have expressed it anyway. It’s time for work now.

    Americans set a lot of store in guns and sell a lot of guns in stores. 

    We like ’em. Cars too. And like cars they are freedom machines. 

    I will grant that it might be lovely if people didn’t feel the need for guns – if we really were safe and really could trust government to be prompt and just. But even if that were the case, it wouldn’t last. 

    Much as the US Navy and Coast Guard pilot armed boats so as to be ready to deal with armed smugglers and pirates, so do our citizens walk around strapped so as to be ready to deal with the same dangers (and worse) on a personal scale. 

    I recognize that different States and people can thrive under completely different sets of rules than ours, and if what you have in Ireland is working for you I truly give you joy of it. Certainly the main antagonist of the Irish is out of that business these days.

    May you never have to reach for weapons you don’t have. 

    • #186
  7. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Psychiatric meds are the likely culprit. Both SSRIs and benzos have suicide warnings on them. And for SSRIs the suicide warnings are for the age group that usually commits these massacres. If you’re suicidal or homicidal, what holds you back from acting on your urge is fear, which is lessened by these meds. If you research all the info on these shootings, buried deep down in the footnotes you’ll usually see the shooter was on one of these type of meds. The shooting the other day in that hospital was done by a guy who was in withdrawal from lorazepam. These massacres really got rolling in the 90s after SSRIs became widely used.

    So maybe restrict these medications further ?

    That is stupid.

    It is like noticing that people in seatbelts die in car crashes therefore we should eliminate seatbelts

    We give people who are unstable medications. The more we do that, the more likely it is someone who is unstable will be on meds.

    While there is an important point there (equivalent to survivorship bias), the selection bias argument is weakened to the degree that SSRIs and such are overprescribed, particularly among youth.

    Seeing as how I believe that ADD/ADHD etc is ridiculously overdiagnosed by our feminized youth apparatus, you can see how I also believe the meds are overprescribed.

    Overprescribed? I have seen SSRIs help a lot of people over the years. I have 30 years of experience in the field.

    No doubt true, but not contrary the point I made.

    Q: You don’t think that the feminization of education and counseling has resulted in a discipline-by-medication war on boys?

    I think the problem of schools is more complex and deserves more than a yes or no answer. I do not believe our 19th century schooling system is what is needed today in the 21st century and it does not serve the needs of up to 40% of children.

     

    But the high preponderance of (mostly very liberal/leftist) women teachers, is unlikely to be good for boys.

    I don’t think it is good for girls, either ;)

    • #187
  8. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    I think the problem of schools is more complex and deserves more than a yes or no answer. I do not believe our 19th century schooling system is what is needed today in the 21st century and it does not serve the needs of up to 40% of children

    One issue is that we have moved away from many of the 19th century ways of teaching. We have even moved away from mid 20th century teaching. Modern instruction is much more collaborative for the students with the idea that this is better preparation for them for a modern job. There might be some truth, but it also misses that children, and even teens are not ready to work in a modern office style where sitting quietly while working independently and asynchronously is prized. Those skills are learned ones, and not applicable for every person.

    It also seems likely to work better for girls than for boys, especially at those ages.

    Which also makes it understandable that mostly-female teachers would prefer it. But it shouldn’t be up to them.

    Female teachers used to be the norm (I believe, without checking) in the old days, particularly American frontier, before education became professionalized.  Back then however, everybody knew that men and women were different, and that boys and girls were as well.  I’ll assume right up front that this involved some deference on the part of not only girls but women teachers to the short-range antics of boys, in exchange for respect for the longer-ranged antics of girls.  My my, what an effective introduction to the way the world actually works, because of the way biology actually works.

    It seems that there were more male teachers in the late 20thC than there are now, and certainly they were manlier.  The herbivore men involved in teaching now (not all, but I bet any rough-hewn man in teaching will confirm this) might as well be women.  A lack of men for boys and young men to look up to and model themselves upon (or vow their undying and implacable opposition to) is half of the problem with this country now.  Fathers, teachers, bosses… all increasingly namby-pamby, and in no small part due to the growth of a smothering mother government.

    Before the education is even considered, boys are already being failed by schools, and in fact, targeted for reduction to a sort of “defective girl” existence by the anti-masculine forces which pervade our institutions.

    Women are not the problem (of course!), but feminization of culture is.  Women don’t even get to be feminine anymore.  But boys do.  What the Hell.

     

    • #188
  9. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Don’t forget SSM. I don’t think we get to all this gender bending confusion without the notion that men and women are indistinguishable in marriage and parenting. Meh, makes no difference how you combine them.

    Reflecting back, I think that the judicial legalization of SSM was a watershed event.

    YA THINK?

    • #189
  10. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Don’t forget SSM. I don’t think we get to all this gender bending confusion without the notion that men and women are indistinguishable in marriage and parenting. Meh, makes no difference how you combine them.

    Reflecting back, I think that the judicial legalization of SSM was a watershed event.

    The slippery slope we were told doesn’t exist.

    It also means that standards no longer exist, and not just on the now-indefensible series of hastily abandoned improvised defensive positons running tdown that slope.  The only defensible ground was given, and now everything is just a matter of opinion, no harm to you, and you’re a bigot for standing up for a reality literally older than mammals.  “Rise above” our animal origins?  Might as well “rise above” our atavistic needs for oxygen and water.

    No, by exposing people to a society in which even the fact of sex is meaningless, everything swiftly becomes meaningless — there is no solid ground.

    • #190
  11. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    What I hate most is that the ONLY solution that people seem to never think of is to pass more gun control laws. After all, if only it was illegal to shoot people then these tragedies wouldn’t happen. Maybe we need to make mass shootings illegal? In a country like ours, how can a mass shootings still be legal? It’s time we passed a law that makes .ass shooting illegal…wait, I’ve just been handed a note. Mass shooting ARE illegal already? Then how can they be happening?

    [snip]

    But the truth is, there is no way to “get rid of guns” without blowing up both the second and the fourth amendments to the Constitution.

    Might as well trim out some of the older amendments to make room for the rights to gender, healthcare, and an indexed living wage.

    A “living wage” is a very elastic standard.

    Perhaps not – elastic has the ability to grow and shrink, while an indexed living wage will only ever go in one direction. 

    • #191
  12. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    I’ve lived in Japan for decades. Japanese gun laws work because they are in Japan. They also have an annual visit by the police to verify household lists, and they have the right to enter and look about as they please.

    Thanks, but no thanks.

    I never woke up in the morning wishing I owned a gun. 

    Most people don’t until a particular night. 

    • #192
  13. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    BDB (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

     

     

    Heh. I knew Foo back when she had about 5 followers.

    Your Fooier-than-thou attitude is kind of off-putting. 

    • #193
  14. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    TBA (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    I’ve lived in Japan for decades. Japanese gun laws work because they are in Japan. They also have an annual visit by the police to verify household lists, and they have the right to enter and look about as they please.

    Thanks, but no thanks.

    I never woke up in the morning wishing I owned a gun.

    Most people don’t until a particular night.

    Much better to have a loaded gun and not need it than to need a loaded gun and not have it. 

    I said “loaded” because, honestly, is there anything in the world more useless than an unloaded gun? 

    • #194
  15. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    …the attachment of people to what they see correctly recognize as fundamental rights protected by the Constitution.

    Fixed it for you. You’re welcome.

    Why do we have to explain a human right?

    The right to bear arms is in the Constitution. That doesn’t make it a human right and I don’t recognise it as such.

    A lot of people don’t recognize free speech, religious freedom, or equality under the law as human rights, either.

     

    Actually, our Government is currently passing very draconian “hate speech” laws at the moment, laws which have full support of every meaningful political party across the (narrow) political spectrum and the media – who barely report on the issue, other than to support the proposed laws. The resistance comes mainly from a small number of politicians, and a large enough number of concerned citizens. The opposition is gaining a little traction, but is doomed to failure because of the stifling homogeneity of politics in this country. The government plan could be seen as tyrannical, but we won’t be organising militias yet.

    And you haven’t noticed a correlation between populations that are anti gun-rights (including here in the United States) and populations that support this sort of tyranny?  The villainized ‘gun-culture’ in the United States is merely the natural manifestation of a culture that values individual rights more than an ephemeral sense of security-in other words, the alternative to a ‘gun-culture’ would be a ‘serf-culture’, and draconian laws in violation of basic free speech rights are a natural manifestation of such a culture (as are Woke policies and regulations on college campuses, which has metastasized into a full-blown mind-virus among those who lacked a prior intellectual or cultural commitment to liberty).

    • #195
  16. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    BDB (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Don’t forget SSM. I don’t think we get to all this gender bending confusion without the notion that men and women are indistinguishable in marriage and parenting. Meh, makes no difference how you combine them.

    Reflecting back, I think that the judicial legalization of SSM was a watershed event.

    YA THINK?

    There was no reason for the state to recognize homosexual marriage as the same thing as heterosexual marriage. They aren’t the same thing.

    • #196
  17. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    G. Gordon Liddy always made a great big deal out of “gender” versus “sex”. He was right. Gender is only about language.

    • #197
  18. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    I detest the “not an inch” position of Democrats on abortion. I’m not a fan of the corresponding position of Republicans (whom I wholeheartedly support in every other respect, except maybe tort reform) when it comes to guns.I know that abortion always takes a life, whereas guns don’t. But the “cold dead hands” attitude leaves me cold. 

    • #198
  19. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I detest the “not an inch” position of Democrats on abortion. I’m not a fan of the corresponding position of Republicans (whom I wholeheartedly support in every other respect, except maybe tort reform) when it comes to guns.I know that abortion always takes a life, whereas guns don’t. But the “cold dead hands” attitude leaves me cold.

    So you keep saying.  We get it.  You object.  You will change zero minds here.  Anything to add?

    • #199
  20. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Guns are less prevalent today than in past centuries because everyone needed guns as tools for defense and hunting. When I was in high school in the late 60s, student pickup trucks in the school parking lot had rifles in the truck gun racks in the school parking lot during hunting season. Nobody gave it a second thought.

    My white-bread midwestern suburban grade school in the early 1970s had a rifle club that met after hours in the school gym to shoot .22s. I was maybe 4th or 5th (?) grade – if I look hard enough I’m pretty sure I still have my marksmanship certificates in a folder somewhere which would have the years on them. My older sister talks about finding brass on the floor during gym class.

     

     

     

    • #200
  21. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Your first reaction might be to recommend we increase law enforcement by 25% but that increases the tax burden in a country where taxes are already more regressive than in other countries.

    The United States has one of the most progressive tax systems in the world.

     

    • #201
  22. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Psychiatric meds are the likely culprit. Both SSRIs and benzos have suicide warnings on them. And for SSRIs the suicide warnings are for the age group that usually commits these massacres. If you’re suicidal or homicidal, what holds you back from acting on your urge is fear, which is lessened by these meds. If you research all the info on these shootings, buried deep down in the footnotes you’ll usually see the shooter was on one of these type of meds. The shooting the other day in that hospital was done by a guy who was in withdrawal from lorazepam. These massacres really got rolling in the 90s after SSRIs became widely used.

    So maybe restrict these medications further ?

    That is stupid.

    It is like noticing that people in seatbelts die in car crashes therefore we should eliminate seatbelts

    We give people who are unstable medications. The more we do that, the more likely it is someone who is unstable will be on meds.

    While there is an important point there (equivalent to survivorship bias), the selection bias argument is weakened to the degree that SSRIs and such are overprescribed, particularly among youth.

    Seeing as how I believe that ADD/ADHD etc is ridiculously overdiagnosed by our feminized youth apparatus, you can see how I also believe the meds are overprescribed.

    Overprescribed? I have seen SSRIs help a lot of people over the years. I have 30 years of experience in the field.

    There’s a suicide warning on the FDA label for SSRIs. So I don’t think the analogy to seatbelts holds up.

    There are all sorts of warnings on medications.

    The Suicide Warning is specifically for the fact that when very Depressed, one may not have the energy for suicide. There is a window where an antidepressant can give you more energy but your mood has not followed. Thus the warning.

    I do, actually know what I am talking about.

    And if you get just a  small fraction of 1% of those prescribed who have homicidal thoughts to go with their suicidal thoughts, you can get an increase in mass shootings…

    • #202
  23. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Psychiatric meds are the likely culprit. Both SSRIs and benzos have suicide warnings on them. And for SSRIs the suicide warnings are for the age group that usually commits these massacres. If you’re suicidal or homicidal, what holds you back from acting on your urge is fear, which is lessened by these meds. If you research all the info on these shootings, buried deep down in the footnotes you’ll usually see the shooter was on one of these type of meds. The shooting the other day in that hospital was done by a guy who was in withdrawal from lorazepam. These massacres really got rolling in the 90s after SSRIs became widely used.

    So maybe restrict these medications further ?

    That is stupid.

    It is like noticing that people in seatbelts die in car crashes therefore we should eliminate seatbelts

    We give people who are unstable medications. The more we do that, the more likely it is someone who is unstable will be on meds.

    While there is an important point there (equivalent to survivorship bias), the selection bias argument is weakened to the degree that SSRIs and such are overprescribed, particularly among youth.

    Seeing as how I believe that ADD/ADHD etc is ridiculously overdiagnosed by our feminized youth apparatus, you can see how I also believe the meds are overprescribed.

    Overprescribed? I have seen SSRIs help a lot of people over the years. I have 30 years of experience in the field.

    There’s a suicide warning on the FDA label for SSRIs. So I don’t think the analogy to seatbelts holds up.

    There are all sorts of warnings on medications.

    The Suicide Warning is specifically for the fact that when very Depressed, one may not have the energy for suicide. There is a window where an antidepressant can give you more energy but your mood has not followed. Thus the warning.

    I do, actually know what I am talking about.

    And if you get just a small fraction of 1% of those prescribed who have homicidal thoughts to go with their suicidal thoughts, you can get an increase in mass shootings…

    Um, Depression and homicidal thoughts are not really common.

    But hey, if you want to advocate banning antidepressants because you think they might make a mass shooting more likely, go for it. 

    • #203
  24. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Psychiatric meds are the likely culprit. Both SSRIs and benzos have suicide warnings on them. And for SSRIs the suicide warnings are for the age group that usually commits these massacres. If you’re suicidal or homicidal, what holds you back from acting on your urge is fear, which is lessened by these meds. If you research all the info on these shootings, buried deep down in the footnotes you’ll usually see the shooter was on one of these type of meds. The shooting the other day in that hospital was done by a guy who was in withdrawal from lorazepam. These massacres really got rolling in the 90s after SSRIs became widely used.

    So maybe restrict these medications further ?

    That is stupid.

    It is like noticing that people in seatbelts die in car crashes therefore we should eliminate seatbelts

    We give people who are unstable medications. The more we do that, the more likely it is someone who is unstable will be on meds.

    While there is an important point there (equivalent to survivorship bias), the selection bias argument is weakened to the degree that SSRIs and such are overprescribed, particularly among youth.

    Seeing as how I believe that ADD/ADHD etc is ridiculously overdiagnosed by our feminized youth apparatus, you can see how I also believe the meds are overprescribed.

    Overprescribed? I have seen SSRIs help a lot of people over the years. I have 30 years of experience in the field.

    There’s a suicide warning on the FDA label for SSRIs. So I don’t think the analogy to seatbelts holds up.

    There are all sorts of warnings on medications.

    The Suicide Warning is specifically for the fact that when very Depressed, one may not have the energy for suicide. There is a window where an antidepressant can give you more energy but your mood has not followed. Thus the warning.

    I do, actually know what I am talking about.

    And if you get just a small fraction of 1% of those prescribed who have homicidal thoughts to go with their suicidal thoughts, you can get an increase in mass shootings…

    Um, Depression and homicidal thoughts are not really common.

    But hey, if you want to advocate banning antidepressants because you think they might make a mass shooting more likely, go for it.

    “not really common” does not contradict “small fraction of 1% of those prescribed”.

    Where did I call for banning?  Just recognizing there may be a link.  Simply because something helps a lot of people doesn’t mean there aren’t negative effects too.

    Everythin\g happens at the margins.

     

     

    • #204
  25. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Psychiatric meds are the likely culprit. Both SSRIs and benzos have suicide warnings on them. And for SSRIs the suicide warnings are for the age group that usually commits these massacres. If you’re suicidal or homicidal, what holds you back from acting on your urge is fear, which is lessened by these meds. If you research all the info on these shootings, buried deep down in the footnotes you’ll usually see the shooter was on one of these type of meds. The shooting the other day in that hospital was done by a guy who was in withdrawal from lorazepam. These massacres really got rolling in the 90s after SSRIs became widely used.

    So maybe restrict these medications further ?

    That is stupid.

    It is like noticing that people in seatbelts die in car crashes therefore we should eliminate seatbelts

    We give people who are unstable medications. The more we do that, the more likely it is someone who is unstable will be on meds.

    While there is an important point there (equivalent to survivorship bias), the selection bias argument is weakened to the degree that SSRIs and such are overprescribed, particularly among youth.

    Seeing as how I believe that ADD/ADHD etc is ridiculously overdiagnosed by our feminized youth apparatus, you can see how I also believe the meds are overprescribed.

    Overprescribed? I have seen SSRIs help a lot of people over the years. I have 30 years of experience in the field.

    There’s a suicide warning on the FDA label for SSRIs. So I don’t think the analogy to seatbelts holds up.

    There are all sorts of warnings on medications.

    The Suicide Warning is specifically for the fact that when very Depressed, one may not have the energy for suicide. There is a window where an antidepressant can give you more energy but your mood has not followed. Thus the warning.

    I do, actually know what I am talking about.

    And if you get just a small fraction of 1% of those prescribed who have homicidal thoughts to go with their suicidal thoughts, you can get an increase in mass shootings…

    Um, Depression and homicidal thoughts are not really common.

    But hey, if you want to advocate banning antidepressants because you think they might make a mass shooting more likely, go for it.

    “not really common” does not contradict “small fraction of 1% of those prescribed”.

    Where did I call for banning? Just recognizing there may be a link. Simply because something helps a lot of people doesn’t mean there aren’t negative effects too.

    Everythin\g happens at the margins.

     

     

    The use of SSRIs have been blamed for mass shootings in this thread. I am responding accordingly. 

     

    • #205
  26. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    TBA (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    If you fail to see a problem, you’re never going to solve it.

    Have you recommended how to solve it? I may have missed that.

     

    There’s an old joke in Ireland, about the tourist slowing down his hired car and asking a local man for directions to some destination. The local man says-

    Well if I was going there, I wouldn’t start from here”

     

    Maybe everyone here (with a very few exceptions) is happy with the prevalence of guns in their society and does not see any connection between that prevalence and any mass shootings – no problem no solution necessary.

    I’m addressing the very basic point that a society without guns is a better place – in that sense- than one where they are too prevalent. It follows that I believe that working towards a reduction of guns in America would be a good thing.

    Obviously my opinion is not too popular here. I’m happy to have expressed it anyway. It’s time for work now.

    Americans set a lot of store in guns and sell a lot of guns in stores.

    We like ’em. Cars too. And like cars they are freedom machines.

    I will grant that it might be lovely if people didn’t feel the need for guns – if we really were safe and really could trust government to be prompt and just. But even if that were the case, it wouldn’t last.

    Much as the US Navy and Coast Guard pilot armed boats so as to be ready to deal with armed smugglers and pirates, so do our citizens walk around strapped so as to be ready to deal with the same dangers (and worse) on a personal scale.

    I recognize that different States and people can thrive under completely different sets of rules than ours, and if what you have in Ireland is working for you I truly give you joy of it. Certainly the main antagonist of the Irish is out of that business  these days.

    May you never have to reach for weapons you don’t have.

    Down side is he will never have the joy of shooting skeet (or in the general direction of the clays) and will miss out on a great pleasure, shooting targets at the range.

    • #206
  27. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I detest the “not an inch” position of Democrats on abortion. I’m not a fan of the corresponding position of Republicans (whom I wholeheartedly support in every other respect, except maybe tort reform) when it comes to guns.I know that abortion always takes a life, whereas guns don’t. But the “cold dead hands” attitude leaves me cold.

    Why? Carlton Heston was making a point, a very good point. One of the main reasons for the 2nd is to deter a corrupt government that would become tyrannical. Governments that aim to exercise that sort of authoritarian governance come after the guns so citizens can’t stop their tyranny. Heston’s message was if you want to come after our guns like that then we will fight to the death to defend our right.

    • #207
  28. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Guns are less prevalent today than in past centuries because everyone needed guns as tools for defense and hunting. When I was in high school in the late 60s, student pickup trucks in the school parking lot had rifles in the truck gun racks in the school parking lot during hunting season. Nobody gave it a second thought.

    My white-bread midwestern suburban grade school in the early 1970s had a rifle club that met after hours in the school gym to shoot .22s. I was maybe 4th or 5th (?) grade – if I look hard enough I’m pretty sure I still have my marksmanship certificates in a folder somewhere which would have the years on them. My older sister talks about finding brass on the floor during gym class.

     

     

     

    Kids were taught gun safety and were safer around guns Today they are taught how to have safe sex.

    • #208
  29. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Your first reaction might be to recommend we increase law enforcement by 25% but that increases the tax burden in a country where taxes are already more regressive than in other countries.

    The United States has one of the most progressive tax systems in the world.

    You are right. I used the wrong word. My bad, was bitten by autocorrect and my cursive. I will fix it.

    • #209
  30. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    […]

    So maybe restrict these medications further ?

    That is stupid.

    It is like noticing that people in seatbelts die in car crashes therefore we should eliminate seatbelts

    We give people who are unstable medications. The more we do that, the more likely it is someone who is unstable will be on meds.

    While there is an important point there (equivalent to survivorship bias), the selection bias argument is weakened to the degree that SSRIs and such are overprescribed, particularly among youth.

    Seeing as how I believe that ADD/ADHD etc is ridiculously overdiagnosed by our feminized youth apparatus, you can see how I also believe the meds are overprescribed.

    Overprescribed? I have seen SSRIs help a lot of people over the years. I have 30 years of experience in the field.

    There’s a suicide warning on the FDA label for SSRIs. So I don’t think the analogy to seatbelts holds up.

    There are all sorts of warnings on medications.

    The Suicide Warning is specifically for the fact that when very Depressed, one may not have the energy for suicide. There is a window where an antidepressant can give you more energy but your mood has not followed. Thus the warning.

    I do, actually know what I am talking about.

    And if you get just a small fraction of 1% of those prescribed who have homicidal thoughts to go with their suicidal thoughts, you can get an increase in mass shootings…

    Um, Depression and homicidal thoughts are not really common.

    But hey, if you want to advocate banning antidepressants because you think they might make a mass shooting more likely, go for it.

    “not really common” does not contradict “small fraction of 1% of those prescribed”.

    Where did I call for banning? Just recognizing there may be a link. Simply because something helps a lot of people doesn’t mean there aren’t negative effects too.

    Everythin\g happens at the margins.

    The use of SSRIs have been blamed for mass shootings in this thread. I am responding accordingly.

    I said that they are overprescribed, not that they are useless or without merit.

    • #210
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.