Posted on 02/20/2018 7:09:48 AM PST by Wolfie
bump
My expert opinion is that a person has gotta be pretty effed in the head to shoot a bunch of schoolchildren.
Many in the "mental health" industry are themselves serious whackjobs.
(It’s actually a bit of a trick to kill yourself with a rifle or shotgun. It’s not impossible by any means, but it’s a hell of a lot harder to shoot yourself in the head with a rifle that it is with a pistol.)
Ask Ernest Hemingway about use of a shotgun ...
He probably is, see my post #22.
These Florida kids being led by the nose by their commie handlers seem to miss the link that their friends were killed by one of their own fellow students. Not some unknown psycho that walked in off the street, but one they had classes with, joked with, had lunch in the cafeteris just before he was expelled.
>
Few studies have sustained as much criticism as Study 329, a placebo controlled, randomized trial of paroxetine and imipramine carried out by SmithKline Beecham (which became GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) in 2000). In 2002, a US Food and Drug Administration officer who formally reviewed the trial reported that “on balance, this trial should be considered as a failed trial, in that neither active treatment group showed superiority over placebo by a statistically significant margin.”4 Yet this same year, according to the New York State Attorney General’s office, which sued GSK, over two million prescriptions were written for children and adolescents in the United States, all off-label, after a marketing campaign that characterized Study 329 as demonstrating “REMARKABLE Efficacy and Safety.”
Got a reading comprehension problem folks?
The drugs don’t work in teens and children; neither showed that it was superior to a sugar pill in terms of being effective. Worse, they massively increased the risk of suicidal ideation - by anywhere from 2.5 to more than five times depending on the specific drug in question. Finally, the government (FDA) knew all of this in 2002.
Why would you allow a doctor (of any sort) to prescribe a drug to someone that we know, scientifically, does not work in that person’s age group?
But what we also know is not just that they don’t work and raise the risk of self-harm — they also potentiate violent criminal behavior in a small percentage of children, adolescents and those under the age of 25 who take them.
In fact these drugs as a class basically double the risk of violent criminal conviction in that age group.
>
Yet, I just had a few on FR kneeling-n-head-bobbing for the FDA as the ‘great savior’ of human life\health.
If it wasn’t ‘approved’ it’d never be on the market. So, while you’re dying, grasping at straws, tough-luck. But, they’ll OK these kind of mind-altering drugs\placebos.
Follow the $$, as the saying goes. If only We were Free Men, in charge of our own bodies/destinies/outcomes.
>
1) Stop overprescribing drugs
2) Arm security personnel in schools
3) Get parents to be parents and not have government schools be parents
>
We *should* be acknowledging that psychology/etc. are pseudo-sciences. We don’t have the science to say one thing or another vs. the brain (chemistry).
That too means there are SOME people whom should NOT be in the general public, forever\for ANY reason. Least not until its (better) understood.
As for #2: Don’t need to add any armed security; just get GOVT out of the way of people wishing to utilize their inalienable Rights
#3 won’t happen if/until they pay the bill themselves. Kill property taxes, DoEd & unions. Make mom/dad/etc. pay for 1/2 yr (??) directly. Allow ONE warning, then expel w/o refund. Watch how ‘involved’ parents become
Yes, Coach should have been armed! Or, all that is needed is a smoke bomb in the hands of qualified students, teachers, custodians sufficient to disable a shooter. Could certainly have saved lives.
A crazed killer will get his hands on a weapon. He doesn’t have to do it legally! Naive we are to think it only takes a gun.
Yes, Coach should have been armed! Or, all that is needed is a smoke bomb in the hands of qualified students, teachers, custodians sufficient to disable a shooter. Could certainly have saved lives.
A crazed killer will get his hands on a weapon. He doesn’t have to do it legally! Naive we are to think it only takes a gun.
“Seriously, he thinks it is a rational decision to plan and execute multiple murders? “
—
Yup - and apparently this guy is prominent enough for somebody to care about asking him to opine. Oy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.