When will it end?

[Paddy]

My father would have died 18 years earlier than he did at the hands of a criminal, but my perforating the SOB with a very large hole put a stop to that.

A decade later I performed a citizens arrest of 3 hoods breaking into our neighbors house, which at the time was only occupied by their 16 year old daughter. An assist goes to my 12 gauge magnum. Racking that thing ends 99.9% of all confrontations, sight unseen.

Is it hard taking a life? You betcha, but the alternatives and the guilt of inaction would have been much much worse.

I'm well armed to this day, a SIG P-239 .40 S&W. I have a concealed carry license and use it. Margie has a Beretta 9000 9mm and is also licensed. Both of us have combat training. All 3 of our adult kids are likewise, and when the time comes I'm sure Erik will do the same.

Being a victim is not an option.

One has to wonder if someone in that classroom had been armed, and had the opportunity to use it, if most of those deaths and injuries could have been prevented. Unfortunately the only state that would have allowed for that is Utah, but it's something to consider.

There was a case a couple of years ago, in the South I believe, where an assistant principal had a gun in the trunk of his car so he could go to the range after work. A school shooting incident started whereupon he ran to his car, got the gun and returned to the building. He encountered the shooter mid-act and killed him, no doubt saving many lives.

Sounds like a plan. Platitudes certainly aren't going to work.

Simply "outlawing" guns will not stop violence; crazies, criminals and terrorists will find a way. Hell, a motivated person could take out a classroom (and then some) with some processed aspirin.

Hell, for that matter anyone with a basic metal shop and easy to acquire skills can make all the weapons they want, rendering any gun ban moot. Just a trip to a discount tool dealer and away you go.

Oh yeah, the retarded notion that if you can't be armed to the teeths, the criminals will kill you

[Brian Ellis]

Platitudes certainly aren't going to work.

Dunno about that, what will work? Why do other heavily armed countries and unarmed countries have comparatively less per capita criminal violence and gunshot-related deaths, by a factor of 10? This is a question that must be answered before any solution can be found.

Switzerland is a country which also has a problem, at a smaller scale, but has more arms per capita that even the USA. I can think of only one case of a rampage over the past 30 or 40 years, when a guy broke into the Zug parliament in 2001 and used his military weapon to liquidate 14 deputies. Since then, there has been an on-going debate about the militia keeping weapons at home, especially as they are also used occasionally for suicides and family disputes. This came to a head a few months ago when there was a gratuitous shooting of a girl waiting for a bus by a soldier returning home with his arm. The authorities have decreed that soldiers should retain their arm but not have any munitions (it would be easier to distribute munition than arms in an emergency). This has been an intensely political debate that has no place on this forum, but has divided extreme right and the left and the "arms but no ammo" rule is a compromise, which will take a couple of years to implement. Nevertheless, concealed weapons are forbidden (there are a few exceptions) and there is very little gun-related crime (a minor hold-up of a post-office without a shot fired would be headline news). Perhaps, even more significant, senior politicians don't even have minders. I was lunching once at an ordinary restaurant in Berne when the President of the Confederation and the Minister of Finance walked in and just sat down at a table not 10 m away from me, like anyone else, and ordered the plat du jour with 3 dl of wine. No one turned round to look at them or try to talk to them. Outside of parliament, they are just ordinary people, minding their own business. This is a mindset of non-violence in possibly the most heavily armed nation in the world, proportionally speaking. Many people do not even bother to lock their front doors or cars, except in the city centres and kids and women do not need accompaniment, even at night (of course, there is odd sexual perversion crime, but even that is rare -- read what it says about missing children in the US on the right of the page: “…A child goes missing every 40 seconds in the U.S, over 2,100 per day - In excess of 800,000 children are reported missing each year - Another 500,000 go missing without ever being reported…” )

I can only assume that violence is begotten by violence. This is a vicious circle (with the emphasis on the vice) and I simply cannot see how it can be broken.

[MultimediaMan]

Actually, let's take a look at the last three or four rampages...

What is in common, aside from the method?

Anti-Depressants.

How many people today are on anti-depressants as compared to twenty years ago, or thirty, or forty?

I'm not saying they are the cause, but they do seem to be an underlying factor.

[Brian Ellis]

Could just as easily be the cart before the horse. They rampage because of the frustrations of depression, not because of the fact that they take medication against the depression. Besides which, anti-depressants are widely prescribed the world over. If they were the cause, then it ought to know no geographical boundaries.

OK, let's say that depression is the cause of a sudden mental click, (I'm not saying it is) then rampaging would be rife in those countries with known high levels of suicide, such as Sweden. A rapid Google reveals that this is not the case.

If depression or anti-depressants were the cause of rampages, then the obvious solution is not to treat the depression but to remove or alleviate the fundamental cause of it.

Now, are you sure that depression or anti-depressants is common to all the cases? It strikes me that fury can also be causal. I'm not saying one way or another, just trying to explore whether there is any commonality.

[Dr Mordrid]

Actually many recent studies show that especially young people can react violently to antidepressants or the sudden quitting of same. This has caused many to be "black labeled" for use in young folks, meaning a big huge warning that unfortunately gets ignored by pill pushing shrinks. Playing with brain chemistry in adolescents and young adults with drugs made for older people is not necessarily a good thing.

The Va. Tech killer, this one in Chicago, the kids at Columbine and many, many others are examples where going off the meds was the tipping point. You cannot just 'cold turkey' off these drugs. If you do a dangerous crash is more than just possible. There are many other examples where going on the meds skewed the personality & caused violent behavior mods.

Even though the major news item with antidepressants is young people even some adults can react badly to them, and I'm one of them. Years ago my docs at the pain clinic tried to use Paxil for my chronic nerve pain, which is not an unusual "off label" practice (off label meaning using a drug for a purpose other than its FDA certification, something that is allowed here in the US and rather commonly done).

Within 2 weeks I started having very disturbing thoughts. Fortunately in one of my more 'normal' moments I called the doc and he immediately cut the dose in half, which helped a lot. 3 weeks later he quartered it then 3 more weeks later he stopped it entirely.

I can only imagine what would have happened if I had not recognized something was wrong.

Now imagine an adolescent or young adult having those thoughts but without the experience and common sense of an adult, neither of which they have by definition.

[MultimediaMan]

Again, Anti-Depressants are proscribed differently country to country... even regionally within a country. I think that a good start would be looking at the actual medications being proscribed along with the dosages. Another question: How many people are taking multiple Anti-Depressants; again what kind and how much? Statistics are hard to come by because of Health Care privacy laws.

Here in the U.S., as long as there is no substance abuse history, if an ordinary person THINKS they are depressed, then that is the clinical diagnosis most of the time. These prescriptions are being handed out by primarily by Family Practicioners and Hospitalists - very few people get diagnosed by a Psychologist. Let's not forget that this is a high-profit enterprise for both the Doctors and the Drug Companies. There are warnings to be sure, but I think they need to made much stronger than they are presently... especially for the Doctors proscribing them.

Another core question is why do these people lose control? Nearly all of these cases have been "extended suicides". These people are making a considered decision to kill, then end themselves. Why? What kind of a mindset does one have to have to rationalize this, and carry it out? How does this mindset develop? Are there causal factors?

One motivational factor seems to be attention given to the person, if only posthumously, who carries out such an act. Any person needs not wonder whether or not they will be remembered if they perform such an act during the course of their suicide. These people seem to be lonely or at least unfulfilled, and tend to think of themselves as ignored or marginalized.

[Paddy]

There is a proven association with an increased risk of suicide for young people on SSRIs during the first few weeks of treatment. I am not aware of that extending to violent behavior to others.

As Brian suggested, the fact that someone is on antidepressant therapy is of doubtful relevance to the rates of gun crime due to all the confounding factors. Someone who can casually walk into a school and shoot several people are arguably not of sound mind in the first place.

[ALBPM]

Actually, let's take a look at the last three or four rampages...

What is in common, aside from the method?

Anti-Depressants.

How many people today are on anti-depressants as compared to twenty years ago, or thirty, or forty?

I'm not saying they are the cause, but they do seem to be an underlying factor.

1.) Antidepressants...

2.) Locations: Schools and Shopping Malls where Firearms are not permitted - "Gun Free Zones" These individuals want the "Power to Off themselves" after taking a large number of Innocent victims with them.

Oh yeah, the retarded notion that if you can't be armed to the teeths, the criminals will kill you.

Yes!!!! Don't you see the pattern here...These events only happen in the so called "Gun Free Zones" where the Law abiding people are known to be unarmed.

This has not happened at a school in the State of Utah where licensed teachers and students can carry a concealed weapon.

[Dr Mordrid]

Latest from Chicago;

He had been in a psychiatric program and was on/off my old "friend", Paxil

[The PIT]

Latest from Chicago;

He had been in a psychiatric program and was on/off my old "friend", Paxil

Doesn't look like the medics etc got it quiet right. Dunno about your country but you've got to consider the persons rights as you can't force them into hospital even though they need help.

[DukeP]

One thing remains constant with many of these cases: all too many, including this guy and the one at Virginia Tech, were psychiatric patients who were either on or recently quit taking antidepressants. The number cases where especially young people act out in this manner is IMO becoming very disturbing.

When I read this, My first thought was - perhaps antidepressants doenst work right on young people. Perhaps antidepressants cause too much instability, when suddenly switched off.

I always thought that the target clientel for these kinds of drugs where all in their late 50's.

I wonder if using these drugs are actually helping anyone at all.

~~DukeP~~

[Paddy]

When I read this, My first thought was - perhaps antidepressants doenst work right on young people. Perhaps antidepressants cause too much instability, when suddenly switched off.

I always thought that the target clientel for these kinds of drugs where all in their late 50's.

Certainly not. The vast majority that I have prescribed were for people under 50. I'd say the majority was 30-45, but with a significant number under this. I don't doubt that depression is under reported in older groups, but their attitudes to medication differ.

I wonder if using these drugs are actually helping anyone at all.

I'd certainly hope so. Again, with so many confounding factors it is difficult to tell if it is medication or just time. I use the PHQ9 (google) questionairre to asses treatment response.


Ignore bad typing - beer

[cjolley]

This has not happened at a school in the State of Utah where licensed teachers and students can carry a concealed weapon.

And it hasn't happened in Oklahoma where they can't.
In fact it's hardly happened anywhere.

Very few places where large numbers of people congregate allow guns.

[cjolley]

Ignore bad typing - beer

Looks like you typed beer just fine.
How's this? - Sake

[Dr Mordrid]

Very few places where large numbers of people congregate allow guns.

37 states (last I checked, the list is growing) have "shall issue" permit policies that allow any 'normal' person to have a concealed carry permit. Some other states have "may issue" policies, but only two states (Illinois and Wisconsin) and Washington DC do not issue concealed carry permits, though these policies may have to be changed after the US Supreme Court rules on a case this summer challenging DC's policies. So far the challenge has been upheld in the Federal Appeals Courts.

In the concealed carry states what constitutes an 'allowed person' and the 'limited places' are defined in the enabling legislation. The 'allowed person' definition excludes felons, those under criminal charge, persons who are the target of a protection order, those under mental health care etc. In Michigan the 'limited places' list includes;

hospitals, stadiums, theaters larger than 2,500 persons, schools & dorms, child care providers, casinos, taverns and places of worship.

Even those limitations have exceptions; you're allowed to carry if just dropping your kid off at school or child care providers, if the place of worship allows carrying (ours does for members), the parking lots for the above list (except casinos) etc.

There IS a move to allow college staff and students to carry on campus in light of recent events. The feeling is growing that Utah and those colleges in Colorado that allow concealed carry have it right and that people have the right to defend themselves there just as they would on the streets in front of the institution.

28 states also have "Castle Doctrine" and/or "Stand Your Ground" laws extending the right to self defense, which applies to those who can carry but is not limited to them. This allows persons to defend themselves or others using any available means and with deadly force.

Can we carry when we go shopping? Most certainly. We see fellow permit holders all the time in stores, malls, home centers etc.

Can we carry on the city streets? Yup.

Can we carry in our car? Yup. Without a permit one needs to put the weapon in the trunk, but with a permit you can have it on the seat next to you, in a console holster or on your person.

Can we carry in our home or on our property? Yup, even without concealed carry permits.

Can we carry while hunting/fishing? Yup, also without a concealed carry permit as long as the holster is openly visible and you have a hunting license. This was passed into law in 1945.

Can we act to protect others while in legal possession of our guns? YES, under Michigan's "Castle Doctrine" & "Stand Your Ground" laws which extend ones legally defensible territory to the public streets.