They're not on antidepressents and popping pills like crazy. That's one thing to note.
This from one of the GOATs at SHU
- Thread starter NYShoreGuy
- Start date
These disturbed people want to kill people. I don't think it's going to reduce much. They'll find other ways to do it.
you sure?
Antidepressant use in Europe continues to break records
Doctors continue prescribing anti-anxiety medications such as lorazepam or diazepam for long periods despite the risk of addictions. Meanwhile, under-investment in psychological care is making things worse.
civio.es
Yes I’m sureyou sure?
Antidepressant use in Europe continues to break records
Doctors continue prescribing anti-anxiety medications such as lorazepam or diazepam for long periods despite the risk of addictions. Meanwhile, under-investment in psychological care is making things worse.
https://www.businessinsider.com/cou...ut,rate is the highest in the developed world.
so US is #1 by so insignificant a margin. now compare US mass shooting numbers globally. my god!! off the charts
youre not sure. youre wrong. antidepressants/anxiety meds are high across the globe. yet US mass shooting is in another dimension. so whats the reason?
Let's not talk about precedent. This present Supreme Court completely ignored precedent with Roe and Casey. A double precedent. Moreover, Justice Thomas has signaled other precedents are in danger as well with regard to privacy rights.
This document is not a static piece of paper frozen in time. The beauty of it is that it breathes with life. Interpreting it as originally intended suffocates its vitality and life and is absolutely a false way of looking at this document. So many issues cannot be interpreted as originally intended because it did not exist. The Constitution must live or it will wither and die.
Btw, the process of amending the Constitution is now dead. We have not had an amendment since 1992 in the 27th Amendment. Before that was 1971 to lower the voting age to 18. 2/3 of both Houses to agree on something is pretty much impossible.
That’s just antidepressants. Add Ritalin, Adderall, anti-Anxiety meds, etc. We are highest in just about every category.
U.S consumes 81.3% of the total Ritalin prescriptions in THE WORLD.
https://psychcentral.com/adhd/the-d...ver-prescription-of-ritalin#ritalin-explained
Last edited:
Given the partisan nature of Congress, 2/3rds is a good thing. Maybe if they started acting like mature adults….
You are wrong. The 1992 ban showed a reduction on mass shootings during a 10 year period. The beauty or nightmare thing about an AR-15 is how easy it is to obtain, use and kill at a distance with deadly accuracy. The arguments that other things will be used is a false argument.
There are lots of disadvantages to other forms of killing. Bombs are difficult to make and dangerous to make as well as use. Many people blow themselves up making bombs. Other weapons cannot kill as many as an AR. Other weapons you have to get up close to kill. Biological weapons? Well that is very complicated and well beyond most peoples' ability. Other weapons are very ineffective to back up law enforcement. That is why the AR is the weapon of choice.
And this train of thought is exactly the problem. So let’s just pretend it’ll happen no matter what and we’ll just look the other way.
That thought process has worked so far, right?
1) Nearly 200 years of precedent prior to Roe trumps 49 years after it.
2) We agree, the Constitution is a living document.
3) The process for amending it is as alive as ever. It requires the highest of bars to pass an amendment to ensure it is a change worth making. It needs to be an overwhelming majority for a reason. By the way, it also needs to ratified by 3/4 of state legislatures after it passes 2/3 of Congress.
Where did I say look the other way? I said the problem is deeper than guns, get to the root of the problem. If you don’t get to the root of the problem you’ll find more problems. That’s common sense.
Imagine using your train of thought for everything. We could get rid of things like soda for health benefits. Just think of how many deaths, addiction problems, domestic abuse incidents we could get rid of if we got rid of alcohol and marijuana. Only following your train of thought. Let those who use it responsibly lose out because of the few who abuse it.
Last edited:
so youre blaming mass shootings on adhd medications???
always fighting to the last drop. US skews 100000% for mass shooting incidents, amd the answer is.... Ritalin! only ritalin.
btw. what about other adhd meds that arent name brand ritalin? do countries consume those?
You’ve lost this discussion……nonsensical response as usual.
Another woke idiot athlete who shouldnt be speaking on the issue...move on
discussion? its just you trying to avoid saying that maybe our gun laws are the main contributor to our insane mass shooting statistics. theres been no discussion. youre just kicking the can down the road refusing to address this.
Abortion was never considered a constitutional right until an activist court said it was. That incorrect decision was just corrected.
Ummm ok. Logic please.
so following your train of thought, we should have just tried to figure out why Hitler acted the way he did back then and spend years doing that instead of taking action? We should have figured out his mental health issues first and treat that.
This isn’t minority report. It isn’t a fictitious theoretical world.
Please go on.
Basically you’re saying the lives lost by these specific shooters are more valuable than those killed by a drunk driver if you want to take away guns and not alcohol. I believe 30 people a day are killed by drinking and driving. How come you’re not calling for the removal of alcohol from society? Do you really want to save lives or are you just offended by guns? Talk about looking the other way. I’ll guess you don’t own a gun so it has no impact on you but taking away alcohol would impact you. I’ll guess more die a year from drinking and driving than mass shootings. Just a guess here.
Last edited:
You’re not paying attention. We have gun laws that aren’t enforced. Take guns out of criminals hands, stop bail reform where criminals go right back on the street, don’t plea gun crimes to misdemeanors, enforce red flag laws. Illinois has an assault rifle ban, red flag laws, but this kid was able to buy a half dozen guns. This wouldn’t have happened if the laws were actually followed.
We also have a mental health and drug crisis here that is much worse than many other countries. If you can’t comprehend that it contributes to the problem I can’t help you.
Making assumptions to support your argument is really a poor way to attempt to make a point. I do not appreciate you putting words in my mouth and creating an argument just to fuel your theory.
Let’s get back to your original statement and stay on point.
Your words in response to reducing or eliminating assault weapons was:
“These disturbed people want to kill people. I don't think it's going to reduce much. They'll find other ways to do it.”
That is what is essentially saying stricter gun laws with much, much harsher penalties won’t make a difference with all the deaths caused by guns.
That is turning a blind eye.
Lol your whole entire argument started with a false accusation of turning a blind eye.. That’s not turning a blind eye. Turning a blind eye is letting it go completely. Then you made the great comparison regarding responses to these mass shootings and responding to hitler. I never said anything about stricter gun laws. I said take guns off the street and these people will find ways to do what they want. Our gun laws are pretty strict in Illinois, didn’t stop much. What’s your solution now make Illinois gun laws more strict, then when someone does it again make them more strict, and so on? A lot of people have done damage in the past without guns. I don’t know by you think that won’t happen in todays world.
Mass Murder without Guns | National Review
We’re focusing on the wrong thing.
www.nationalreview.com
Last edited:
Uhm, it is a privacy right. Which was affirmed by a conservative court and written by three conservative justices in Casey.
Most rights are not a right until the Supreme Court says so. Was marriage a constitutional right in the US? It was illegal for mentally retarded people to marry and interracial marriage. Until Loving in the 1960's declared that it was a fundamental right and that Virgina State Law violated the equal protection clause.
In Griswold, which predated Roe, the Supreme Court found that couples had the right of privacy to use contraceptives. It was the first time the Court found the right to privacy. But certainly the right to privacy exists within the Constitution does it not? While not specifically found, various Amendments provide that right.
Similar threads
