Love help: my3sons says to me, in regards to the virginia tech shootings: - Help.com

If you are contemplating suicide, hurting yourself, or you are seriously depressed: please, seek professional help!

Call this hotline (1-800-273-8255) operated by our friends at the
Suicide Prevention Lifeline, anytime, for free, professional, and
confidential assistance. While other Help.com users are likely to reply
to your post, please make sure you understand that your use of Help.com
falls under our TOS.

Note: I’m a robot that the Help.com staff created. If this response is in error, I apologize, please ignore it.

I agree to a point. What if someone shows signs but never does anything wrong? Who sets the standards? Will there be standards? So someones future is depended on if the person that is doing the judging dems them as a threat? What if they are wrong. That person will miss out on an education - on a good future.
I agree if the person has a history of issues. But what if there is no history? There are so many ways this can go wrong. There are so many ways this can hurt innocent kids that just want to learn.
On the other hand, it can save lives. This is true. But…
Do you know what I’m trying to say here? I’m not sure if I am making this clear.

I totally agree with the required treatment. That would be a better alternative then not letting them in. I can understand not letting them in if there is a history (as I mentioned above). But with no history, if they feel this person is a threat - required treatment is a good option.

Personally, I have had to make a few sacrafices and are happy to make them due to 9/11. I was there. And I am still here everyday since then.

I would caution people about testing for mental stability. If indeed there were such a viable test, who polices such results? This could open an ethical pandora’s box. If a person tests ‘a danger’ what then? So he will not be admitted to college. If there was a reliable test to detect sociopaths, what would we do with them when we find them? And let us not forget the multitude of ‘ he seemed like a normal guy to his neighbors’ theory. (BTK) The human pyche is very complex. If it were easy to weed out the deviants I would support such testing but wouold still be perplexed as to what we should do with them once weeded out.
We have laws in place to protect us from stalkers, murders, and rapist. Do they work? Not as they should, but I think focussing on this aspect of criminal behavior may be a more viable option than testing. College campus’ have dropped the ball when it comes to policing there populations and not supporting the victims of crimes. They aften worry more about the rights of criminals. As Americans, we know we can move mountains when we are united for a goood cause. But it takes everyone working together to make a difference.

hmmm i think it’s a great idea

AKS, I like you a lot. I enjoy interacting with you and reading your replies, and I consider you my friend. I don’t want to lose that.

That being said, now let me say this: This is a terrible idea. I almost thought you were being tongue-in-cheek as I was reading it. Are you honestly suggesting that we empower agents of the state to police peoples thoughts, deny them college entry, force them into “treatment”, and lable them for life based on somebody else’s idea of instability? This is how fascism starts.

A deranged act like this is something unpredictable. There is no formula for preventing them. They happen only once in a blue moon, and while that may be slim concilation to those whom this heinous act has affected, it is still not worth the rest of us walking around in fear. Fear means the bad guys win.

Besides, anyone who is “unstable” enough to do this thing in the first place is not going to be detered by kicking him out of his job or school.

I’m sorry AKS. I don’t like this idea. I would rather preserve my constitutional liberties that were won by our forefathers with much blood and treasure. Let us not abandon what it means to be an American because of one person’s crime. That’s what it is, after all; a crime. Not a mental illness or a political revolt or a cry for help. It is murder, and we already have a law against that. He who would break that law would break others too, and additional laws would only overburden the law-abiding population.

I would not be signing that letter.

Please, people, I implore you to look at the consequences of the can of worms you are opening up. Turning our college campii in to quasi-Inquisitorial courts is not the answer. Has any institution in the history of the world ever not abused such authority when it was given it? Do you really want to trade one Va-Tech shooting for a generation of terror? For a Hitler or a Robbespierre?

This is not the way. And let me repeat one more time for the benefit of those who missed it, the proposed solution is not going to deter anyone who already has the crime of murder/suicide in his heart. It is a futile ramping-up of pseudo-police activities that will only be a breeding ground for fascist demagogues.

This is a bad idea. Do not throw away your rights! Do not let fear make your decisions for you!

Fronde is right too, and just like everything else it would turn into paperpushing eventually anyway. but there probably needs to be a stonger policy of booting people off campus if they are showing signs of problems until they get help and have some sort of clearance to get back into school.

Findley,

That is my point as well, it would become mundane everyday, and eventually not a tool that would be used but a paperpushing scenerio. exactly rich kids parents would pay an astronomical amount of money to the allum and the system would be useless

I know you’ve all probably heard this a thousand times, but I think it deserves a place in this context.

“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”

—Benjamin Franklin

true fronde nicely put

I don’t believe the solution is to exclude certain people from college (on most college campuses, you don’t need to be a student to be on campus unquestioned by a long shot), but to ban private (ideally, all) ownership of lethal weapons. If this poor man hadn’t had firearms, this tragedy would have been averted.

For years my mother did psych evaluations in the military for six years. Any time a soilder requested a special school (say sniper training) they did an evaluation. Plus, first sargents would bring certain people to her, like “Hey, this kid seems really weird, do you think you could talk to him awhile?” She got to the point she could tell when someone was faking it and when someone really needed a padded cell. I think that anyone handed a weapon should have at least a psych eval.

Hey aks. lol & here I dont think anybody really listens to me. (blushing)
I think its a good idea that need some work. It has some kinks in it that probably needs to me worked out. Most peopel who do this sort of thing have a diagnosis of manic depression. I think it would be a good idea to put some clauses in the diagnosis like if you were simply diagnosed with a mild depression maybe the requirements to get help wouldnt be quite as strict.

Interesting charcterization AKS.

I personally am an old-world conservative, a Prussian consevative, you might even say a monarchist. I hold with Edmund Burke, Alexis de Tocqueville, and Oswald Spengler. I am a registered member of the Republican Party, and I did vote twice for George W. Bush, but I do not like the direction the party is going. I oppose the Iraq war for the same reason I opposed the idea in this post—it is an abuse of the concept of state authority to over-police the world. And when this is done in the name of public safty and patriotism, the slippery slope of fascism has already been tread down.

Liberty, freedom, and a respect for other people’s property are what I consider to be the true conservative ideals, and I would love to see both the party and the nation move in that direction, rather than the way we are going.

By the way, if there are other paleo-cons on this board, I’d love to meet you and chat with you.

You have some very good points fronde. I’ll have to look up that paleo-cons thing. It is true that we don’t want to get this country lets say into an almost communist standard but come on this protecting our kids here from being gunned down in place they should be safe in.

I’m with you on that aks.

Yes, My3sons, it is. Unfortunately, as I was trying to say, you can never protect somebody from a deranged act. They are chaotic and unprdictable. To try and do this leads to the yielding of liberties that ultimatly make everyone less safe. I consider a police-state to be far more of a terror than the occasional armed lunatic. I would rather risk the latter than the former, and will do so in every momentous question asked along these lines.

But it really gets me that people who dont even have any sort of pychology degree see the warning signs way before but nothing can be done
There are certain diagnosis that are very common in people who do these type of extreme acts. I think a test could be applied & not all but most could be weed out this way. I think its worth it until we figure something else out to really make a difference not only in the student body but for these people who so desperately need help.

I love that just for a minute there some of you thought that people who are mentally unstable would all be detected by this ‘magical’ test and that they wouldn’t slip through the proverbial net OR then decide to take their revenge on a college for denying them access in the first place. If it was that simple and practical it would have been in places years ago. Plus, there is a danger of seriously violating people’s rights, if a person has depression because of a traumatic past do they deserve to be denied the right to an education? Don’t they have the right to keep this information to themselves? Do they deserve to be labeled and forced into treatment for something they could deal with differently? Does this level of depression mean they are doing to do something horrible?

I agree with what the Fronde said in the begining. Bad idea! But thanks for playing!

I WAS making a point. I am perfectly aware of the differences and was not using the word magical literally. My point was that even the most qualified of people wouldn’t necessarily be able to design a test to weed out sociopaths successfully and what would prevent a sociopath from falsely passing such test? And what’s to stop people from getting labelled incorrectly because of this ‘test’. It could not be done fairly, ethically and still respect human rights.

Also, the reason I chose depression is to point out that they may NOT be detected by this ‘test’ but could still snap (same as anyone) and do something stupid/dangerous.

And…the comment “And taking revenge on an institution for rejection would be unusual” Unusual for a sociopath? Is there such a thing?

wow too many posts on this subject to play catch up
look at my picture i am a mildly alienated korean male american born
im not going to shoot anyone thats all i have to say

Pleased to hear it.

Sorry, my dear friend, but I cannot write to an congressman or whatsoever about it.

This is an idea. A starting point. There are different labels of mental stability that can be given to a person tested but certain labels are red flags. Anti-social disorder which sounds bad is actual fairly mild & common is just someone who has trouble interacting with other people but does not indicate that they would necessarly harm someone. Where on the other hand Manic depression is a label that is given to those who are likely to create violance to harm someone.
Its not an idea that is anyway infailable but I think it is indeed something to consider. I know from my own son having several tests done over the years, these labels are not given easily. If something like this were to exist there should be some clause & guidelines that would address those who had a milder form of depression. Someone with some more severe labels could maybe be offered an alternitive to their education or some may be offered to still attend school as long as they are recieving help.
I am not a physcologist so I can’t really be one to pinpoint really good ways to put these clauses & guiidlines into an effective order.

you have the rep/dem thing backwards

and the solution is to arm all students and teachers and train them. the sooner American citizen learn that they must all be a part of our defense and national security - the better. it is not fair to the children in this country to keep turning a blind eye to the truth. their are dangerous lunatics (terrorists if you will) that are determined to wreak havoc at any opportunity. we must prepare ourselves. it will happen again.

to arms my fellow citizens! to arms!

aka - get real

you are in La La land if you think we can figure out who all the nut cases are before they strike.

i had an opportunity a few years ago to befriend someone just like VT lunatic. long story short - he graduated and moved on - but not until after he got kicked out of dorm, fired from his job, befriended by me in a time of need - I let him work for me doing raking and painting and since he was on my dollar sometimes i used the time to talk with him - he was a major stress case who never talked, wore hood to class, made obsene beathing phone calls on campus (why he got fired) - he broke in in hives one, told me he had cancer when he did not…. told me his parents would kill him if he did not graduate on time. but i encouraged him to get job and appt and pay for last class in summer school which he did…

the end is good - but could have been very differeent - trust me - i know.

his own cousin commited suicide in his junior year.

i thought he might kill himself.. i was worried about the kid. but who know what else was lurking there. he did talk about wanting a gun for a while.

anyway. again i say… get real

if every young kid in america was packing a gun you know how ridiculous it
would be. tell the parents that their children will now be attending a campus where every other 18 year old is carrying a firearm. WTF are you on crack

you’re funny rook :) but seriously, there is no reason we should not train our young people to defend themselves and their schools. if we are not teaching them and bringing them up in a way that allows for this, then maybe we need to revisit that.

if you are going to try to test for mental illness and exclude people for it, i say let’s arm the kids instead. What is the difference really. One way innocent people get screwed for having some problems that may work out, probably will work out. The other way - some guilty person gets shot before too many people are dead.

yeah - ok- wo we gave him the gun. But he knows he is surrounded by people with gums. and since terrorists are really cowwards at heart - i’m betting they will be too chicken to start…

im sorry about saying you were on crack that was rude of me i apologize
.. i think you dont have to test for anything really. a large society that is advancing to a certain post-modern development (bored kids watching cable tv) as opposed to a third world developement (kids working in sweatshops, wondering where food is going to come from) you will have these kind of random acts of violence every now and then. its something that if you try to control, that measure will be misused to create abuses, as opposed to keeping in the spirit of the law. really he was checked by a counselor and determined at some opint i believe in 2005 to be a danger to himself and others. this obviously should have been a flag for him to recieve more psychological counseling and attention. Also, im up for general citizens being armed, as its declared in our constitution, but somehow seeing young people + guns just doesnt seem like a great idea.you want to ask me do i trust young people to drive safe? hell no. insurance corporations know the statisitics and so do the department of motor vehicles and national highway saftey board when they look at fatalities.. As far as adults (25-55) carrying? Yes. A teacher or professor? Possibly. Someone in a position of authority that they earned. A teacher who had some protection would have been able to incapicitate the VT Shooter. It doesnt mean every single life form has to have one, just have some of the faculty or staff have some. But that should be a person of community respect so we can trust their judgment and have confidence in how these dangerous things can be used a crazy scenario. strive for balance not absolutes.

anon-
really? are we still blind after 911 to think that people would be too coward?

I see your point to a degree but do we really want to go back to cowboy & indian days where we have shoot outs? Cause I really think that would happen if we did such a thing.
Can you not see some real chaoitc situations that very well might occur if we were to apply this solution?

ok - then guns with trusted people… fine then… and alot of em too.

and kids should be trained to deal with these things in advance as well.

and is it not a shame that in our culture kids can’t be held more reponsible. i mean they actually are capable, but we just keep patting them on their heads saying it will be ok when it won’t. no wonder some of them snap - so many lies.

not that i agree with the choice of violence - i do not. but maybe if we raise the standard and opportunities for these kids they will be less likely to have to face thse situations or at least be more prepared for them when they come up.

of course - we all barely know our own neighbors - so why should kids care about the quiet boy that no one knows….?

and if they are not too coward - let have some other weapons out there to stop the &#*(!@&!()@ is their tracks…

“of course - we all barely know our own neighbors - so why should kids care about the quiet boy that no one knows….?” - yes this is a social defect in our culture today, hopefully we will all fix this you make a good point here

kids should not be held more responsible because they are kids. just like how we dont and should not imprison children. they have minds that are not even finished being developed. yes there are some natural born psycho children out there who probably should be locked away for life and will manifest some horrible thing later in life again but that is the price we pay for the right to call ourselves an enlightened society

but yeah i like the idea of a community picking “trusted people” - it seems to be a commnity effort and involves the community in a TV culture that has forgotten what community means. the more community we can get, the better the nation will be

Ok, I havent read this whole thread yet but i’ve got a point that im not sure has been made yet.

The harder you make it to get an education, the more poor or homeless people there will be. When you’ve got more homeless or desperately poor people, you can ecpect a spike in crime as well. A spike in crime may mean more murders. Therefore, this whole mental stability test theory basically defeats the purpose of itself.

What do you think?

One thing I have not seen mentioned above is how Hitler was apparently kicked out of art school, and he went on to do other things.
Therefore, is being in school really the problem?
In this case, one may wonder if WWII would have actually happened if Hitler was accepted into art school.

Also some interesting info to support some points above…
-Our environment controls much of our behaviour. In one study, 60% of participants actually killed the confederate in the study when they were directed to by an authority figure. The confederate did not actually die in reality, but the participant was given the impression that this happened.

So, if our environment controls us so much, what is the real cause for taking ones life?

- Psychology is always changing and evolving. We may be able to label symptoms, but discovering causes of those symptoms and what brain areas or environmental stimuli are responsible for those symptoms is complicated in itself. There is so much debate occuring in psychology that it seems that there are no facts, only theories. Experimental results can be interepreted differently depending on what theory is used. The more I learn in psychology, the more questions I have.
If there is so much information which is unknown, how can a reliable test be formed?

The tests that I am aware of now, seem flawed in many ways.

In order to have a successful test, we must know:
- what we are measuring
- if we have a reliable way of measuring
- what the level of error is
- if what we are measuring is valid (ex. We may measure a person’s shoe size effectively, but is that related to committing murder?)

There are problems which can arise for each of these factors. Considering the number of factors, how effective can a test be?

- From what I learned in class, two psychologists decided to admit themselves into a mental facility, to see if the mental facility would be able to determine that they were normal people. A problem arose when they told the mental facility exactly who they were, that they were actual psychologists, and they were not allowed to leave. The psychologists had to receive outside help in order to gain their freedom.

- Also, from what I learned in class, only a small fraction of psychopaths actually harm people. Many live normal lives, and provide a benefit to society, since they tend to be very focused people. Some become excellent surgeons.

I do not support administering a test at this point in time. Psychology knowledge keeps changing. There are so many factors, so many abstract concepts and so many perspectives to consider to understand psychology and to formulate a test. Even simple tests for experiments have flaws. My concern is that the test would not be valid or reliable, and cause greater problems than it would solve.

This is a dangerous slippery slope… Does the mental stability test piogeon hole people with depression…This scares me…..

Elaten-Okay like maybe Hitler took his violence out somewhere else but the school was safe & thats what we are talking about here. We cant come up with the answer for the safety of all of society in one blog.

Seems kind of like a slippery slope. So what if they are rubber stamped “dangerous” and not allowed in school. What if they were wrong? This person is now not goiing to have any education, no future! Maybe jobs get ahold of this info. So no job either. All based on a test.
Yikes.

Also, i wonder… if you’re labeled mentally unstable, would that make you more likely to believe you are mentally unstable? And if you believed that, would you be more likely to become a murderer?

yeah - label me and kick me out of school… we all know guns can be gotten illegally. now i really have a reason to shoot someone!

database this! cajun…

isn’t it grand… and no one else knows either. completely cracked in the head and even the tests, even the bosses, co-workers, fellow students, family, friends… no one knows… i truely am - anonymous. not that i would ever hurt anyone - i would not, but you would not let me purchase a gun to defend myself? i live alone, i am a woman, i am trained in the use of many kinds of firearms. i lock all my windows and doors, i am not looking for trouble… i am even licenced to carry it concealed though i rarely do. i am one of those trusted community memebers. see…? mentally unstable is not the same as crazed murdering lunatic or even stupid killing someone by mistake untrained do-gooder wanna be.

it is all about defending, not offending. i avoid dangerous situations.

im a card carrying member of the NRA alone with my mom and sister and brother

and you would have me inelligible - because i seek help for my pain and suffering?

you are the one who needs help… don’t be afraid — even cops are allowed to seek counciling now and then… geesh!

PS - mental illness is not always permanent - it is like a broken arm for some people…

i am not concerned…. i have said nothing that is inappropriate or wrong… you are obviously very sure of yourself and your ability to judge other people - hope it doesn’t backfire on you… i am only posting anonymous to avoid arguments based on my other postings - to keep the focus on what i say here - not who i am.

you sure are keen on those databases… ever read 1984? big brother is watching you…LOL

everyone has capacity for violence and unstability. It’s a sense of false comfort to Label people, and it’s prejudiced.

How do we accurately determine who will be a criminal?

Post I’m confused…not agreeing with you implys a lack of deep thought? I’m not talking about rapists. I’m talking about this broad, roomy all inclusive space of mental instability and capacity for violence.

I’m saying that it’s too broad a subject to label anyone unstable. Lets say the day I went to get ‘tested’ because I was entering school, my kitchen sink taps blew up. I had water everywhere. Then my husband came home and told me he was leaving me for another woman. THis came after a year of arguments(not reality, theroetically) and a phone call by the neighbors for domestic dispute by the cops. Then on the way there, I got into an accident, and then stubbed my toe on the way in. I am not an unstable person, but that day I was. Do you think it fair to label me unstable, and deny me entry to school because I had a REALLY bad day? It’s all well and fine to rubber stamp the truly unstable people, but some WILL be labeled unfairly in the process, and this kind of label ruins lives! I know there are rapists and child molesters, but there are also 18 yr old boys who where simply caught having sex with their 15 yr old girl friends, and now that they are in their 20’s, they can’t find decent jobs, and people who find out that they are on the ‘list’ yank their children away in horror and lock their doors.
This is simply another tool that would seperate people into ‘them’ and ‘us’.
As a person who claims to beleive in and respect quantum physics, this goes against the grain of beleiving we are all one.
Also, it is a cultural thing that creates people who would do this anyway. Even jeffery Dalmer had a mom who thought he was great as a kid. We are a Godless, disconnected society that glorifies our monsters. You think that kid made a tape for NBC thinking it wouldn’t be aired? He was counting on his horrible 15 minutes of fame that our culture seems so willing to give. In fact we’ll devote days and days worth of fame, going so far as to block out actual news in favor of the monster’. Heck, we even have trading cards for serial killers. You’re like a movie star if you kill enough people! You can be some weak, weaselly,geeky looking dude, but if you shoot up a school or a shopping mall, your bigger than Babe Ruth!
So again, no, I don’t think it’s a good idea. There is too big a margin for error, and that is unaceptable, also, it won’t fix, solve or prevent anything. In fact, I can see it making things worse.

I’ve said all I’m going to say on it. All the attention this kind of thing gets is part of the problem as well.

Well I guess it is useless to argue over really. Its an incomplete idea that most of us in here have no expertise in really to know what clauses & guidelines could be put in to make it effective.

well yeah it wasnt arguing but disagreeing to the point it was clear there was no end. lol

u cant controll a person!!!! reguardless of a stupid personality test!! because a “perfectly” “normal” person can one day say “hey i’m tired of my life” and go on a shooting spree…..we are human beings….

AKS, You have once again opened the door for great debate. I still do not think a blanket test for mental instablity has been devoloped that could truly help stop college violence but the fact that people are talking so passionatly about it is a step towards a solution. The world need more great thinkers, keep up the good work.

msbria—-Yeah if they’be been interbreeded with a pitbull….lol

in these times you have to be crazy to not be mentally ill..LOL the truth is the mentally Ill are less likely to be engaged in violent behaviour then the population as a whole.. You need to pigionhole the violently ill…A different bunch then the mentally unstable…. It would be a sad day in the US to keep people with mental problems out of school..

There is nothing wrong with dropping someone from the school for showing symptoms of instability. It is not racist or predudiced, and it doesn’t matter if it is a boy or a girl or dark skinned or light skinned or red head or blonde or blue head or earinged or tatooed or anything. Unstable is unstable and and needs to be dealt with. It is not prejudice. Its discretion.

Booting this kid off campus based on his mental stability would not have prevented such disaster. There are no gates or fences around the schools, no guards to check everyone that comes on campus.

The real answer was to not let this crazy person buy a gun in the first place!!!

He didn’t steal them. He bought them And he did have some kind of mental evaluation. And the judges are saying now that based on wot those docs said, he should not have got a gun.

How could the store have known that he was a crazy kid? They had no way of knowing. If people were more ‘prejudiced’ and he had been thrown out of school for his instability, wouldn’t that have gone on his record and have been found on the backround checks (that are mandatory for purchasing firearms)? Instead though, the teachers and neighbors and parents and friends (God bless them, they didn’t mean any harm) decided to be kind and not make a big deal of his behavior and their failure to be prejudiced caused the boy to have noe marks against him.

But it wasn’t the guns’ fault. If he couldn’t have gotten a gun, he would have gone online and found out how to make russian cocktails and fertilizer bombs and would have killed maybe even more people. He was the problem. Also, if the gun couldn’t have made it to him legally, he would have gotten it off the black market or stolen it from somebody. Increased gun supervision does not keep guns from ‘bad guys’, it cripples the ‘good guys’ defence, and cripples the second ammendment of the constitution of the united states of america.

This is just another typical example of gun laws not being enforced. The laws are there, but the liberal judges just keeo letting people get away with…. murder - is what it all comes down to. If the judicial system would enforce the actual laws we already have, these situations would be much less likely.

But the liberal agenda is to take all the guns away - so they manipulate the system to encourage the results for this agenda…

The Second Amendments must stand and we need to start throwing extreemist liberal judges (of which there are many!) in jail for their Evil and Illegal legislating from the bench.

don’t you think it’s more important to have a mental stabilty test for buying a gun than for going to school.

To say they sold him guns because they didn’t know makes no sense. But that people should have a mental stabilty test to go to college? they need to look at people’s mental stabiltu BEFORE selling a GUN. Which is more dangerous in the hands of a lunatic, an education or a gun?

If that guy couldn’t buy guns, all those people would still be alive. A shrink had already said he wasn’t all there. The shrink didn’t know he would go on a killing rampage or else he would have warned people not to keep him in school. But if the gun sellers had asked the shrink, he would have said not to sell him one. It is the job of people selling guns to check to make sure people are stable enough to handle it.

Anon that really makes sense and it would be really great if that were the only weapon he could have obtained.

Yes and the same is true about kicking him off campus and it would be really great if it were the only place he could fid people.

But this is an idea of a solution to help keep the schools safer. There is no one answer to keep the whole world safe. Yes he could have still went somewhere else to cause harm but it may have kept the students in that school safe.

And perhaps he would have gone to a pre-school or day care center instead.
If he didn’t have a gun, he would not have done so much damage.

I can only think of perhaps homemade bombs that would be another weapon for him, which would have led police to evacuate the campus before many that guy went on his second rampage. Besides none of the other school shooting cases envolving homemade bombs killed many, if any, people. It was the bullets.

And think about this as a partial solution, if the person had gone to the gun shop, got tested and found unstable, then and the gun shop owners were required to report it immediately to the police, they could have kept an eye on him and as soon as he started buying stuff he needed for making bombs, the cops could have swtopped him.

Otherwise the only way to solve this problem is to start locking kids up based on their mental stabilty BEFORE they do anything wrong, or when they have start exhibiting violent outbursts when they are still in grade school. If that were the case ÅKSLOGISTIC® would be bind bars today based on what he said about his childhood.

you are being totally unreasonable. I never said anything about locking anybody up.

The partial solution on the gun shop thing is great but that is a separate issue. When your cleaning a really messy house. You have to start one room at a time.

Locking people up based on mental stability alone, is only one step away from what was proposed here– kicking them out of college or keeping them from enrolling in the first place. That is labling a whole group of people. Of course “my locking them up answer” was meant to be unreasonable. Education, could actually help these people.

And what if we do keep them from college or kick them out. These are people who generally are set off by some type of rejection. They get fired, dumped teased … kicked out of school so they go postal, just like the postal worker who lost his job and gave us that phrase.

So in essence, if you kick them out or keep them from attending in the first place that could be the event that triggers his rampage.

for me the solution is carrying a gun, being trained to use it, and prepared to shoot if ever needed…..

If the treatments work, then cool. I’m just a little worried about the kids who hide what they really feel and aren’t helped by the treatments. Also, as a kid, I know if I was going through school I wouldn’t have any friends and would never find any, because it would be humiliating and degrading for me to have to see phsyciatrist and be treated by him for feeling ‘unstable’. It might be enough to make me blow up.

I know I would certainly be depressed…

Also, who would pay for the treatments, More taxes? Or more US debt? (We’re already owing 8.82 billion… and growing)

Also anonymous, if more people had guns and were trained in gun safety and gun usage, it would be better. You are right, you have a perfect point. What do you think would have happened if a teacher had a gun, or even a taser? what if another kid at school had a gun too? maybe things would have ended a lot differently. If weapons were allowed on school (I’m not necessarily saying they should be, just that if they were), maybe kids could be trained with them and bring them, and then it wouldn’t be only the terrorists bring guns to school, you know? It doesn’t make sense to let the terrorists have relative freedom, while tying the law abiding citizen’s hands behind their backs.

yes - and training does not just mean how to hit a target; it also means when to pull your weapon out and when to shoot. so many people are afraid of guns because of folks who buy them, learn to shoot and then shoot some innocent person “by mistake.” it is not by mistake when people arrogantly think knowing how to shoot also means knowing when to shoot.

I apologize, I was generalising. In the VAST MAJORITY of psyco-therapy recipients (or treatee’s or however you would put it), therapy does heal. It does work, I know. All I’m worried about is the -possibility that there may be- 3 or 4 percent of treatee’s that hide their reactions behind a mask. just as you know firsthand about how psycho-therapy heals, I kind of know firsthand how to hide feelings and words behind a mask. I know what it’s like (or knew) to decieve and have everyone you know eating out of your hand. I’m not afraid of those who are genuinely healed or helped by the “shrinks”, I’m afraid of those who aren’t but look like it.

Tcarstense, yes I am fully aware of what you are saying & agree with you totally. I dont think that there is any solution to completely make the schools safe. I am sure if this would ever was to take effect somewhere down the line a few would be overlooked here & there at least once in awhile but it would hopefully help to keep the school safer as a whole.
If not a test upon admission, I think it at least should be the right of a teacher to when she recognizes a student who seems mentally unstable which most of these people usually are recognized prior to these type of killings that they be removed from class till an evalution is done & upon that evalution if deemed necessary a student would be either 1. released 2. required to get help but may still attend school or 3. removed from school until a phycolgist determines he is capable of being in a classroom setting.
This would hopefully help not cure to keep our students safer & at the same time help those who need help.

Cajun is everything a debate for you? Theres a good point with the gun idea, & theres a good point with the testing IDEA. Both ideas need worked on & have some major kinks in them. Everything great starts with an idea.

Actually during the orignal post conversation when I said terms of service, I didnt really mean testing upon admission ( although I do not totally disclude the IDEA), what I really meant was that the terms of service would give a teacher the right to take them & Have them evaluated & that if deemed necessary that they could be required to stay out of school until they get help. Theres a lot that could be put in the terms to cover the school for any kind of lawsuit.

I wouldnt have thought that there really was too much tho argue about when its just an idea but obviously I was wrong about that judging by the length of this post lol

Oh my bad. I need to got back to bed lol. I actually thought on the second paragraph you were talking to Aks. ooops.

which anonymous?

people who commit violent crime and the mentally ill, and children should generally not possess firearms. But somehow in practice, it never stops there, because the political “bang for the buck” incentive is so good for the ballot box.

for instance, they will and they have, expand the definition of violent crime to include all other kind of offenses, they may or already have expand the definition of mentally ill to include the generally unsociable or unpopular, etc. But, lets not get overly cross, as this is standard politics.

“Armed resistance against the US military is pretty much pointless since any weapons of merit have been outlawed. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment was to make sure the people could go toe-to-toe with the government, and the government has made nice and sure that will never happen.” - from some slashdotter

“There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order” -Ed Howdershelt

Ultimately, we will most likely have more and more of these insane, totally off-kilter kids and young adults, disgruntled postal workers, etc… And kaboom.

However, this is a question I pose: Are we willing to accept that kind of random once a year shooting as a COST of democracy and the 2nd amendment rights? Some say yes, some will say no.

There is a huge tension between the rights of “THE PEOPLE” as a free and democratic people which inherited a wonderful but healthy suspicion of the government, AND the need for society to feel protected and safe (as in a gun-less world). I think both should be sought, and figuring out the best way to blend these ideals should be the subject.
Personally I think the new problems aren’t so much gun rights (we as a people are no longer part and parcel of the government, we lose - the first quote nails that one) but the idea of laws such as the copyright infringment act, sponsored by Al Gonzalez - had the people a chance to vote on this, this bill would not pass. But the people hardly know about it, why? because its law bought and sold by the RIAA and media giants like viacom.