20k foot view of school shooting

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
All or almost all of these shooters were wearing shoes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are shoes banned in uk for causing suicide/homocide?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All or almost all of these shooters were wearing shoes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are shoes banned in uk for causing suicide/homocide?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know. They probably should be.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
I never met a non law enforcement person who carried a concealed weapon.

[/ QUOTE ]
How the hell would you know?

[latefordinner]

[ QUOTE ]
SSRI's don't cause homocidal mania. Depression does. And depression also makes SSRI consumption more likely, QED.

[/ QUOTE ]

HMK: It is true that there could be another factor responsible for both. It is also true that one could make the argument that SSRIs have done much more good, than bad and prevented many violent suicides and probably homicides. It is also true that the aggression/rage dysphoric mania that SSRIs can push some people into is well-documented, if rare. As with any strong substance that alters neurochemistry, there are always benefits and drawbacks. It is not the state's responsiblity to decide when people should be "allowed" to take SSRIs or not. It is, however, the responsbility of all those taking SSRIs and their friends, family, and mental health providers to be aware that SSRIs, in some people, especially those with a propensity towards bi-polar issues and anxiety or anger issues, can have strong adverse effects up to and including psychotic rage - especially in the first month of use, in multiple-SSRI combinations, or in dosage rampups.

we are still too far in the infancy of neuroscience and psychiatric pharmaceutical research to be able to predict which SSRIs and which people this will be likely in, and this is in no way a call for the banning of a class of pharmaceutical compounds that has done good and probably prevented a ton of violence, suicide especially.

(I agree that a full discussion of this would probably be better in SMP)

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
we are still too far in the infancy of neuroscience and psychiatric pharmaceutical research to be able to predict which SSRIs and which people this will be likely in, and this is in no way a call for the banning of a class of pharmaceutical compounds that has done good and probably prevented a ton of violence, suicide especially.

[/ QUOTE ]

So why did britain ban them then?

[latefordinner]

[ QUOTE ]
So why did britain ban them then?

[/ QUOTE ]

AFAIK Britain banned some SSRIs for people under-18 (Prozac is still able to be prescribed) because there is evidence that SSRIs can exacerbate suicidality in young people (and as suicidal action is basically sucidal ideation + violence, it is clear that there for some people, an increase of serotonin perhaps results in a propensity towards acting on violent thoughts either of self or other-harm that would not have otherwise been there) FWIW - The evidence is actually there for adults as well, but children are always an easier group politically to "protect from themselves".

You'll find no qualms from me here if you want to assert that the rampant use of psychiatric medications and the medicialization of mental health issues has been driven by the profit-motives of drug and insurance companies and that drug companies have it in their best interest to skew studies away from showing that the compounds they are producing are potentially dangerous. Nor if you want to assert that other forms of therapy are more effective, but less cost-efficient.

I don't believe in government prohibition of much more dangerous compounds that have little positive effects (like tobacco) - why would I believe in government prohibition of a compound which certainly has profound positive effects for some people, and also can have strong negative effects on some people.