Jump to content
SubSpace Forum Network

NIU Killing

Cancer+

By Cancer+
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Drake7707 Newbie

Drake7707

Posted
Posted

Phewt, lucky me that i don't go to university in US. But !@#$%^&*, if they're mentally unstable and don't like to live, they should kill themselves and not other people with them >.>

 

Universities, a new war zone o-O"

ThunderJam Newbie

ThunderJam

Posted
Posted

Problem is universities are struggling with a legal issue of student privacy vs public safety.

 

Should students be forced to reveal any mental conditions in their applications? Should they have to do it once they are accepted and enroll? Should the schools not be able to demand that info at all?

 

You see what I'm getting at...

Samapico Newbie

Samapico

Posted
Posted
they just want attention

And it's happening so often that it's starting to become banal... sadly... So these morons are getting less attention each time.

 

 

And how the !@#$%^&* can you get attention, when YOU'RE DEAD?!?!??

Sure, your name can be known, but you can't even make use of that extra attention

Confess Newbie

Confess

Posted
Posted (edited)

How many people actually even remember the gunman? In my experience, the only gunman they gave out widely was Columbines'. Ever since then, they only emphasize those that were killed. The gunman is rarely mentioned. All that they might get is a "the gunner that killed xNamex".

 

If you want to become known, my suggestion is for you to do the following:

 

- Join a drama club

- Join sports (even if you suck, its good excercise! [if they will let you on the team])

- Join something extracurricular supplied by the school.

- Sing in a Choir (even if your voice sucks, they need you! Theres no such thing as a bad voice! Only an untrained one!)

- Pick up an instrument, and join a band. - The more, the better.

Edited by Confess
Dav Newbie

Dav

Posted
Posted

Im surprised noone has said anything about gun laws yet.

 

anyway something needs to be done, better campus security, better screening to identify those with problems. Im sure people would give up a little provicy (provided its only a little) to be safer.

Cancer+ Newbie

Cancer+

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Im surprised noone has said anything about gun laws yet.

 

anyway something needs to be done, better campus security, better screening to identify those with problems. Im sure people would give up a little provicy (provided its only a little) to be safer.

 

Sadly, there are a ton of people who wouldn't. In my one class in college, there were two cousins who were republican and wanted less gun law restrictions.

D1st0rt Newbie

»D1st0rt

Posted
Posted
Im sure people would give up a little provicy (provided its only a little) to be safer.

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Deathmonger Newbie

Deathmonger

Posted
Posted (edited)

What do all of these shooters have in common?

 

They were all medicated for years on anti-depressants, then decided to abruptly stop self-medicating. You develop tolerance to anti-depressants, and one of the withdrawal side effects is mania. It turns what might be a garden-variety nutball who learns to control his behavior on his own into an inhibitionless suicidal maniac when they stop medicating.

 

It would be better if instead of winding up ticking time bombs with Ritalin, some alternative treatments for nutballs should be considered.

 

Yes, Columbine (Luvox), VT (anti-depressant confirmed but not identified), Oregon (Prozac), Red Lake (Prozac), Georgia (Ritalin), Greenwood, SC (anti-depressant not identified), and so on were all caused by anti-depressant withdrawal.

 

It's no coincidence that these school shootings ramped up along with the rise of anti-depressant medication of US kids. The pharma companies have noted violent episodes as a side effect for years. "Oh, but little Timmy's doing so much better at school since Ritalin... "

 

Why interrupt such a profitable drug business, especially when pharma companies are the #1 contributors to both US political parties?

Edited by Deathmonger
Samapico Newbie

Samapico

Posted
Posted
What do all of these shooters have in common?

 

They were all medicated for years on anti-depressants, then decided to abruptly stop self-medicating. You develop tolerance to anti-depressants, and one of the withdrawal side effects is mania. It turns what might be a garden-variety nutball who learns to control his behavior on his own into an inhibitionless suicidal maniac when they stop medicating.

 

It would be better if instead of winding up ticking time bombs with Ritalin, some alternative treatments for nutballs should be considered.

 

Yes, Columbine (Luvox), VT (anti-depressant confirmed but not identified), Oregon (Prozac), Red Lake (Prozac), Georgia (Ritalin), Greenwood, SC (anti-depressant not identified), and so on were all caused by anti-depressant withdrawal.

 

It's no coincidence that these school shootings ramped up along with the rise of anti-depressant medication of US kids. The pharma companies have noted violent episodes as a side effect for years. "Oh, but little Timmy's doing so much better at school since Ritalin... "

 

Why interrupt such a profitable drug business, especially when pharma companies are the #1 contributors to both US political parties?

Yeah... what a nice world we live in. :o

Animate Dreams Newbie

Animate Dreams

Posted
Posted
What do all of these shooters have in common?

 

They were all medicated for years on anti-depressants, then decided to abruptly stop self-medicating.

 

blah blah

I mostly agree, I just cut out your message to save space. Unfortunately, mental disorders are not considered a grey area, and are instead seen as black and white, "if you have this problem, you need this pill". Ritalin is completely unrelated though....

 

While I'm definitely no expert, I don't believe that these cases were a result of some crazy dude going crazy. I'd much sooner believe that it was a result of a human mind meing messed with chemically, not some natural existing chemical imbalance that just happened. Now, it's easy to criminalize doctors and modern medicine and say they're responsible, but if that's true, what needs to happen? Does that mean ALL medicine for psychological disorders should be cut out? Is it never a good idea? I wouldn't be too surprised if that WERE the case, but... there are so many cases where medication looks to have a positive effect. Should those be cut out too?

Deathmonger Newbie

Deathmonger

Posted
Posted

Many mental disorders are very poorly defined and are mostly a grab bag of vague symptoms tied together with an acronym (ADD, austistic spectrum disorders, etc). Autism for example has a list of about 15 symptoms and if you have x or more you may fit the category. You could not be more wrong about the clarity of psychiatric diagnosis. Ritalin is a very powerful drug with wide action throughout the brain (and hair follicles!); yet, its neurochemical effects are not understood--we don't know how it works!

 

Psychoactive drugs are way over-prescribed for kids due to intensive marketing by pharmaceutical companies in the US. They're great business because once you're on them you become dependent upon them. Virtually every drug company has not one but two salespeople calling on every doctor in the US every two weeks (I've worked with several of these co's). They've even tried to make it child abuse if parents refuse school-mandated anti-depressant treatments. Timmy's being disruptive in class? Slip him one of these every day and see if he mellows out.

 

My answer to your last question is, no I don't think long-term anti-depressant medication is a good solution for psychiatric disorders because we have ample evidence that it leaves many kids vulnerable to Columbine-style withdrawal wigouts should they ever try to get off of the drugs. That suggests that anti-depressants, like most other drugs, work well for awhile until your body builds up resistance, which leads to other consequences. Consequences that in this case are horrible. This is not surprising since they fundamentally alter neurotransmitter concentrations at every synapse of the brain. They are marketed today as a long-term solution with minimal side effects...except for occasional suicidal homicide sprees.

 

For further education:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-depressants

ESCANDAL0SA Newbie

ESCANDAL0SA

Posted
Posted
you guys are ignoring the fact that it was so easy for this guy, and the guy involved in the VT shooting, to get guns. what about stricter gun laws? america is pretty much giving out guns to anybody, sane or not.
Deathmonger Newbie

Deathmonger

Posted
Posted

Actually if VA had recorded that nut's ins!@#$%^&*utionalizations they would have come up on his background check at the gun store. It came back clean. Oops.

 

NYC is the safest place in America for a mugger to work. He'd have to go to London or Paris to find a safer place to ply his trade.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...