2A Supporters: Are You Ready to Take the Weinstein Challenge?

No, not THAT Weinstein – THIS ONE.


Or this one.

Eric Weinstein is an interesting Twitter follow. He has opinions which I would say land square in the middle of the “new skeptical intelligentsia”, part of which would include the “intellectual dark web”, part of which would be outside it, but are disturbed in different meaningful ways that such a thing has to exist (and therefore some people on the left consider them PART of the “intellectual dark web”). Eric is pretty much on the internal border between the two parts of the larger movement, and “gets” everybody.

Stated another way, he’s “Quillette perfect”.

Anyway, he’s worth following even if you just want to see what smart people are saying about stuff.

Well, a Twitter friend replied to him on something, and that led THE WOLF to pontificate just a bit. The tweets were ultimately in response to a QUESTION by Weinstein.

How – 2A defenders – do we stop the NEXT school shooting?

Oh, did I *EVER* want to talk about how I, personally, may have stopped a “non-school” shooting by NOT SHOWING UP in the same room as a politician, thereby nixing an opportunity for the MURDEROUS WHOEVER to pull their little game of “wrap up multiple loose ends”. But then THIS gets into the REALITY of “fighting the future” in a statistical, quantum-ish, highly uncertain, multiverse way – something most people aren’t even ready to consider, much less believe, much less understand.

This gets into all we have observed about active shooter training exercises and drills “mysteriously” preceding active shooters who are used for political payload. This gets into my long-and-painfully-developed “economy of events principle”, which shows how these events nearly always have to have MULTIPLE POLITICAL PAYOUTS for them to occur.

This gets into acceptance that there are technologies IN USE that most of us are not aware of, few of us understand, and nearly none of us is even CLEARED to know about.

This gets into believing that there are motivations IN PLAY which are far, far different from anything which is being revealed publicly to the hapless population of victims and aggrieved family members.

This gets into believing that there is ANOTHER “intellectual dark web” – possibly not all on this planet or even in this universe – that has its own ideas about where humanity needs to go.

Yeah. Some conjecture may be necessary. And you had probably better believe that EPSTEIN didn’t kill himself.

So scratch THAT SHIT. Unless somebody really wants to understand how tenuous ACTIVELY STOPPING ACTIVE SHOOTINGS actually is, when SOMEBODY OUT THERE WANTS THEM, and all we have to go on is the experience of SURVIVORS and WITNESSES – those who have been set up before by sketchy, abused LE and IC, and managed to walk out of their “history grooming process”. Or those who have dedicated their lives to investigating and stopping this stuff.

In that case, then they can look at how it was done in one particular instance.

Seeking QTreeper Counsel on Active Shooter Training and Sketchy Scheduling Thereof


This is a bit of a strange post, and I won’t go into all of the details here and now. Maybe never. However, I am deciding how I’m going to deal with exactly what is in the title, and I want the have maximum information at hand when I do. You folks are a wealth …


So skipping the X-Files stuff, or maybe not, let me show you my responses on the thread.


NOW, I think my idea about “neutralizing” the FAKE NEWS MEDIA is really key to this, but probably not enough. FAKE ENTERTAINMENT has to be dealt with as well. And more.

But that’s just ME.

What about YOU? What do all of YOU think? Most of you have been unplugged from FAKE WORLD enough that you may be seeing answers, too. You may see that THE RIGHT is going to be who solves this problem – not THE LEFT.

I’m all ears. And – hopefully – so are others.


INTERESTING – even if OFF by 1000%
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

My first cut on the mass shooter phenomenon would involve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Calhoun .
Simply put, he created a “mouse universe” where ample food, water, and nesting materials were available in a finite amount of space. Once the space filled up, the mice started getting tattoos and piercings, championing abortion, campaigning for LGBTQ rights, and shooting-up gun-free zones.
The obvious solution is to break-up the cities and move people to the countryside. Then let them get along with people or starve.


You didn’t dive in far enough. Calhoun’s “mouse universe” created a class of “beautiful ones” — mice who ate, drank, defecated, and groomed themselves. They didn’t strive for more; they didn’t strive for status; they didn’t strive for mates. They stayed in their mothers’ basements and played video games while perfecting their mouse-bun hairstyles and arguing for universal healthcare.
I probably live in it more than you do, being that I’m in the San Francisco Bay area.

Gail Combs

Wolfie, We don’t NEED cities.
Why did cities develop in the first place? — LACK OF TRANSPORTATION!!!
You will find plenty of ‘cities’ in the under 25,000 population range with thriving industry. Heck MOST US ‘cities’ are under 50,000 people
You can compare the murder & crime rate Per 100,000 people for cities in the 40,000 – 60,000 range
Notice the rate is mostly in the single digits except for New York, New Jersey, California, Colorado, Louisiana and such.
For the top 100 most populous cities in America (~250,000 and up)
The rate is generally much higher.
Here is the murder rate by state:comment image

Deplorable Patriot

Cities develop not just because of transportation, but TRADE and business.
If you take a look at the location of the 25 largest metropolitan areas just in the US (this pattern is EVERYWHERE) every one of them is at the mouth of a river, or as close as the settlers dared to put a trading post (Pierre Laclede) to the mouth surrounded by flood plain. New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Miami, Philadelphia, etc. Every one has at least one port, and every one started out as a trading post. They were later connected by rail lines. To get goods in from other countries, other parts of our own country, cities developed. Industry could have been better spread out, maybe, But the innovation for all sorts of goods and services we now take for granted would not have happened without population centers.
I’m a city girl. I like the culture that comes with it. It’s not for everyone. But spreading out as far as the eye can see is NOT the answer to the pathologies of cities. A return to manners and decency and a respect for human life is, that is if it ever really existed in the first place.

Gail Combs

I lived in Rochester NY (Erie Canal) and at the time, over 50 years ago, we did not have an inner city problem. We had a ‘poor section’ but the churches saw to it that the help was available so the homes were kept up. Each spring was a clean-up day where people would gather to help clean up and paint and plant. Sort of like what Scott is doing now.
From what I can see there was a number of factors.
1. Loss of community identity. People move around a lot more now and corporations have no loyalty to their workers.
2. The FEDERAL government took over the care of the poor from the churches and local community and it became a major source of graft. On top of that the Commie media brainwashed people into thinking the help was OWED to them and not a gift.
3. DRUGS!!! Busing allowed little inner-city drug pushers to make major inroads into ALL school systems.
4. The emptying out of our mental hospitals.

Deplorable Patriot

I’m not going to argue any of that since most of the homeless are mentally ill, but but blaming cities themselves for the lack of respect for life among the residents is a different matter.


There were a lot of factors that that led to the growth of cities…
Limits on transportation was a big one, that really came to the fore with industrialization. Workers had to be close to the factories. Before that, agrarian communities needed land and lots of it. I remember reading a fascinating albeit biased history of Buffalo NY, the first inland boom town in the U.S. and how the transportation issue was a major factor in the town’s development. Where one lived relative to the city center was a direct reflection on one’s economic affluence – determined all of your travel time.
Today there isn’t a need for the factories to be so tightly coupled with a large city. Indeed many factories do just find in rural areas because they have more land and frankly a more stable work force. The key difference between now and 1820 is that electricity allows for delivery of mechanical power.
However the more telling factor for me is the rural de-population that happened in the 1940s and on – rural areas were drained of their populations and the cities grew. That didn’t happen by accident, and I don’t believe it happened organically either.
The other telling factor for me was the initiation of programs of urban decay. Whenever Democrats took control of the cities, most obviously from 1950 on, the cities deteriorated. Rotted. It couldn’t have been accidental but the effort of sustained attack on the social fabric. Baltimore, Detroit, and New York were examples of this. The term “inner city” took on a new hellish meaning.
Families were driven out into the suburbs, the biggest drivers were quality schools and the only way due to the rigid social engineering structured into the public school system was to vote with your feet. Cost was another factor (housing prices, cost of living, taxes) as was safety, but over and over the decisive factor on deciding where to live was schools. So the engineered donut effect happened where much of the money moved out of the city and left the interior to rot under the regime of Union+Democrat scheming
It doesn’t have to be this way. Rudy showed us this. We don’t have to be stuck with “public” transportation either. But living in a city has a strange way of narrowing the public’s perceptions of what the possibilities are while encouraging socializing and government solutions to problems – real or perceived. Breaking the grip of unions and the Democrat political machines is the big key. Proactive policing to break down the criminal tribalism and lawlessness is next. And of course, JOBS JOBS JOBS. Almost all the left’s social ills can be fixed with JOBS. There is less need for criminal enterprise when jobs are abundant and pay better than crime.

Deplorable Patriot

Just as a point to add to the factories where ever they are – most were/are on a rail line no matter where they are. Rail is the cheapest form of transportation, especially for industrial goods.

Gail Combs

“…the rural de-population that happened in the 1940s and on – rural areas were drained of their populations and the cities grew. That didn’t happen by accident, and I don’t believe it happened organically either….”
It was DELIBERATE and the result of plans by a Sister organization of the Council on Foreign Relations the Committee for Economic Development. It was officially established in 1942 and is still ‘re-adjusting’ America to meet the needs of big corporations.
History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job tells the tale of the deliberate destruction of our US culture.
Alternate: http://farmwars.info/?p=1565


You are so right. The HACCP thing is unbelievable.

Deplorable Patriot

As a city dweller who LOVES mass transit (cheaper, saves wear and tear on the car), what is the objection if crime was not part of the equation? I used to pay $64 for an unlimited monthly pass. Parking downtown was $80+ a month, never mind gas and the rest. And that was just to work. Go to a ballgame or hockey game, and the train is $5 round trip as opposed to $10 and up to park.
For me, it was a choice as I can walk to light rail from where I live, but for others who work (remember, we work or we don’t eat) or play it is not one. What they make working does not cover the cost of individual transportation.
I really am curious as to what the aversion is to rail, mass transit, etc., when so many people are more than willing to pay for more expensive transportation modes. I mean, maintaining a car and the interstates ain’t cheap.


Out here in Montana, mass transit is just not an option. Most of us live too far from town for it to be practical, getting anywhere is a drive.
Independence is in the American DNA. If TPTB decide one day to shut down your mass transit, aren’t you trapped? Having the choice to “move” or not is important to me, and I don’t trust the government to control that for me.

Deplorable Patriot

No, I am not trapped. I can walk to church, the grocery store, etc. All are close enough.
Independence, yes, is in the American DNA, but really this is more about the love affair with the car than independence. Before I could drive, I could take a city bus – and did – to school. We used to take them to the department stores, etc.
I really want to know what the objection is other than “it’s not feasible for people who don’t live in a city.” Is it because you wouldn’t be taking it even if you lived in a place that has subways or elevated trains? Don’t want to pay for someone else’s transportation (even if in the end it’s cheaper, and maintaining the interstate system is paid for with gas taxes)? Those are more granular reasons.


But what if you wanted/needed to escape the city? If the grocery store shelves were empty? If there was a natural disaster? Like all those people in New Orleans who couldn’t leave before Katrina hit. That was a real thing, they had no way out.
Public transit is fine as long as it works. I guess I am a control freak and want to be in charge of my own mobility, no matter where I live. I don’t think I’m the only one who feels that way, which is why mass transit doesn’t appeal more to people. It is not about the “love affair” with the car, I drive a junker. But is runs, it’s mine, and nobody can just “close the terminal.”

Deplorable Patriot

Never been in STL during snow storm season, have you. 😉
I may have to write a primer on city living. It’s not as dire as it’s made out to be.


City living is just not for me. I’ve done it. Too many people, too much noise. Not enough grass, trees, blue sky, and animals. I was in my backyard yesterday (I live in a small town of about 4000 people), heard a cry and looked up to see a hawk fly over. I see bald eagles, moose, deer, etc. all the time.
Different strokes…

Deplorable Patriot

We have hawks and eagles.
I have nothing against those who chose to live in less populated areas. What I am less than wild about is all the dissing of life in the cities. I lived in a rural area for a few years. Not for me. It took too long to get places, we were ALWAYS in the car, and there was not a great variety in choices for Chinese food. (We now have Hong Kong style. YEA!)


The other thing is that when I was a kid in the burbs, we are talking 60s, we had grocery stores we could walk to, and libraries and the five and dime, and our schools were only a few blocks away. Church, too. We did walk or bike dance near everywhere. We had one car that Dad took to work. If mom needed something from the store she gave us a couple dollars and a list and we walked to the store.
Now, living in the burbs you HAVE to drive to a PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER miles away.


Personal transportation – is it independence or is it control?
anti mass transportation….some “whys” for some people.
1) Mass transit costs way more than the personal cost to you. If the customers of mass transit actually had to pay the true costs maybe I won’t care. I am paying for city dweller mass transit and paying fees and taxes for the roads used by mass transit + private cars. Mass transit is harder on the system and some needs its very own system.
No cost to the taxpayer and the mass transit user costs included fees/taxes for road use? Fine with me. But costs me $ – not fine with me.
2) Mass transit is a gov run monopoly &/or subsidized hybrid gov/private program that chokes out free competition. Why is the gov in the business of providing transportation, from buses to trains, v. only the infrastructure that people can use individually or develop businesses that use it or both?
I am gut reaction anti mass transit – social welfare program that I am paying for other’s transportation costs (or at least subsidizing to a great extent) and a socialist program that I am paying that blocks free enterprise solutions.

Gail Combs

DP, when Hubby and I lived in the Boston area we used the subway.
The problem is it does not run at the times I needed to get to and from work so I spent about 3 to 4 hours in travel. Second, I rather not try to carry sacks of groc. while standing on the commuter rail for an hour. Last, I rather be out in the woods hiking than in a museum or ball park.

A Fortiori

DP — The problem is financial. Car and truck people accepted gasoline taxes as the cost they needed to pay both for the previous construction and for on-going maintenance of the road system. Unfortunately, for several decades now, Congress has been raiding the Highway Trust Fund for other purposes, including mass transit projects, and because of this our roads and bridges are in very poor condition.
Car and truck people want the roads fixed, and do not view this as a subsidy because they have been paying taxes for this purpose. Proposals for new mass transit projects are seen as divert attention away from the roads, which impose immediate daily costs in the form of wear and tear on their vehicles, reduced safety, and worst of all huge amounts of lost productivity because of time spent sitting in traffic.
These problems are compounded when mass transit proposals are linked with new tax increases on vehicle owners, who believe mass transit users should bear the costs of their transportation rather than foisting them upon others. Again, they arrive at this view based on having paid gasoline taxes which they were told was the cost they needed to pay both for the previous construction and for on-going maintenance of the road system.

Deplorable Patriot

You don’t think the people riding public transit do it for free do you?
And believe me, I know about paying for upgrades to the current system. I live in a metro region with 10 major bridges over the rivers that carry the shipping channels. For the last 12+ years every one of them has been down or otherwise under construction except the oldest one which is a commuter bridge into downtown. The State of Missouri was on the hook for hundreds of millions as two spans over the Missouri were in such bad shape they had to be replaced, one of them carrying I-70, three over the Mississippi have either been down completely or had to have extensive repairs, one an emergency basis all because of wear and tear. Next year is going to be a NIGHTMARE as a huge section of the outerbelt itself has to be rebuilt. It took two years to rebuild a 12 mile stretch of I-64.
If the problem is economic, it’s looking like people don’t want to pay for what they aren’t going to use. If that’s the answer to the question, then say it. Also, please don’t complain when prices rise for various goods and services as employers have to pay their people more so they can get to work if they don’t have a transit system.


Not having read any replies to you, DP, there are thousands of videos out there that show the social problem with mass transit.
When I lived in Boston and had to ride the T around, it was durned scary for a woman at times.

Deplorable Patriot

It boils down to people don’t want to pay for what they are not going to use. What’s being put forth as the financial reasoning can be argued multiple ways as the working poor in metro regions frequently do not make enough to own a vehicle, and public transportation allows them to have a job and stay off the dole.
And if arguments want to be made about roads and infrastructure, we in the STL region had to fight our governor at the time who wanted to pay for the new I-70 bridge with a toll. Remember, 70 is a MASSIVE corridor for shipment. Imagine if those tolls were put into the price of goods. People would be screaming from coast to coast.
Honestly, people don’t want to pay for what they have no intention of using. That’s what this is.


The mass media IS the problem. The “threat” of a mass shooting is blown completely out of proportion by the breathless reporting on them. MANY more people die daily from car accidents, illness, and disease.
If you discount the “mass shootings” which are really just killings by a crazed ex-boyfriend or something, and only count the actual “random monster” shooting up a mall or a school, more people are probably killed by lightening strikes in an average year. The “crazed relative” killings have always occurred; check out the book “Wisconsin Death Trip” sometime to get a feel for what was going on in the late 1800s. Sometimes people just snap and kill their relatives. I find these stories all the time when researching the past.
Part of the reason we are all scared of mass shooters is simply because we KNOW in great detail about every episode. It is drilled into our brains that “it could happen to you.” Well, sure, it could. But we could also be struck by lightening in our own house. That happens, too.


I think wictor right. The mass shootings started when we closed the mental institutions. Sadly some people have/develop mental conditions that means they can’t care for themselves and are at times a danger to others. Unfortunately the stigma of the loony bin and the horrors SOME places inflicted on the inmates made society turn away from them. Lobotomisation was a horrendous response to what was, at times an episode of psychosis or even teenage rebellion(particularly girls). WE DONT DO THIS ANYMORE, people have a right to human dignity even if delusional.
I know no one here likes socialism but we either lock these people up for their (and our) own good in humane environments or we kill them humanely.
The media has glamorised violence before negotiations, as a first response and SOMETIMES this is the correct thing to do. Most situations can be de escalated.
The exception of course is Islamic terrorism where there is no confusion and the attacks are usually planned to maximize casualties. Here the role of gun free zones cannot be ignored. They are target rich low risk and Result in completely the opposite of intended


The other thing is how human brains work. We used to live in small groups and evolved that way. A threat to a hunter gatherer group or small village got everyone’s attention because it was a possible personal danger. Now we here of events hundreds of miles away and our subconscious can’t process that we aren’t in danger and we have a heightened sense of threat.

Deplorable Patriot

Until the psyops of the whole thing are eliminated, we’re going to swim upstream on this one, IMO. Too many people have yet to be red-pilled to the extent those of us who understand what’s happening have been. “News” has been drilled into Americans since the colonies. Getting those who fall for the psyops out of the echo chambers is going to be rough.


Much admiration for Andrew Pollack who in the midst of profound loss, was unwilling to be cast as a grieving father. (Though he had every reason) Instead he smelled something rotten and keeps after them.


Beautiful comment about that dad. He refuses to let her death be in vain. Utmost respect for him.


As of 2017, the USMC has around 186,000 active duty members and some 38,500 personnel in reserve.[2] It is the smallest U.S. military service within the DoD.
In 2017, the FBI ran 203,086 background checks on Black Friday. So far that’s the highest day on record. 2019 numbers have not been released yet.
Anyway, morning radio guy must know the new stats! Said we did it again 🙂

CM in TN

The tweet where you talked of being bullied, but yet would never think of mass murder as retribution. I was the same, would never think of that either…grew up in the 80’s. It is the culture and media today that enables this mass violence. Now it is acceptable to riot and throw tantrums, destroy other peoples property because you don’t agree with something. There is not enough consequences for peoples actions any more. Antifa, black block, BLM are all examples of this social justice gone bad nonsense. We need to change the culture and sideline the fake news that enables this. Lead by example in our communities.


Sicko, perverse, obscene and violent media and drugs have changed our culture.

Harry Lime

This is nothing new…but for me the biggest factors are a combination of the break-up of the family unit through various means – cultural – economic – moral (done on purpose in my opinion)…or the even more devastating statistics on single motherhood before a family unit can even be established, combined with a lack of morals and civility (back to culture)…and then toss in the various psychotropic cocktails of nasty mood altering drugs that are forced on our youth.
Maybe one of these things by themselves would not produce the madness that occurs all too often in our society…but together, in combinations, they create a lot of angry young boys, men, and, as we’re seeing more and more, women, too.
Violence is a problem in every society, always has been, but the statistics show that gun violence, in America anyway, has decreased significantly in recent decades. It’s the the type of violence that has changed…the random violence of lost and lonely people is hard to digest…especially when it is covered 24/7 by our so-called media institutions who too often glorify these lost souls…whether the media realises that that is what they are doing or not (I think they do). They don’t seem to care as long as they get viewers and/or clicks.
In the past there was almost always a motive established…no matter how twisted and depraved it may have been…today we are too often left with just the innocent victims…and an overwhelming emptiness, a haunting silence… left to wonder what on earth has happened to us.
Progressive policy and culture + drugs whether prescribed or bought on the street = the devastation of society.

Harry Lime

Just to clarify, I’m not saying that one cannot get a divorce or be a single mother/father and still raise perfectly wonderful and healthy child…happens all the time…but in combination with the other factors mentioned the risks increase significantly…especially if the parent chooses or is forced to be largely absent.


I like what Wolf said. The media is the enemy. We are conditioned to react to these shootings OUT OF PROPORTION to their relative importance.
I’m leaning more and more to the thought that 9/11 was a MASSIVE event to allow the huge intrusion into our private lives via the surveillance State.
They got us to make their crimes LEGAL through a conditioned response to the national trauma.
The swamp must be drained and the Fake media along with it, or we are going to see a boot on our collective necks forever.


Not to derail, but Bret Weinstein, who I believe is Eric’s brother, has been tweeting about one world government and been rather anti-Christian.
After having his butt handed to him on Twitter, he came back with a really lame sort-of mea culpa that didn’t back away from anything.
Has made me very suspicious of their online presence as thinkers that conservatives can trust (as in classical liberals).
That said, Eric seems more logical and enlightened than Bret.


I would need all night to study from this comment. 😄
I’ve sworn off Twitter for Advent, so I haven’t been able to follow up on Bret. I don’t like the anti-Christian stuff or the antisemitic stuff that is swirling around. Seems like it is a lot of smoke and mirrors going on.


“FAKE ENTERTAINMENT has to be dealt with as well. And more.”
I’m surprised no-one has mentioned the effect of violent video games as being a factor in causing mass killings, and in other violent crimes. I’d be surprised if a mass killer wasn’t heavily into violence oriented games. It always seems to be a common denominator.
I watched a young kid back in the early 1990’s playing Grand Theft Auto. I was somewhat shocked to see how much disregard for the health and safety of others was a part of that.
Some background:


I would add that in doing a search on video game violence most results were articles by liberal media outlets poo-pooing a possible connection between them and violent behavior. Maybe because it doesn’t fit their narrative of guns being the cause of the killings, and thus the need for stricter gun control laws.

Sadie Slays

The “intellectual dark web” is controlled opposition. The fact that they’ve all been given blue checkmarks and haven’t been deplatformed tells you all you need to know.

Sadie Slays

Quillette seems like a place for older liberal academics to go pontificate to each other about the old days, i.e. Leftist political opinions from ten years ago. A place like that is allowed to exist because it’s never going to truly rock the boat just like all of these “intellectual dark web” mouthpieces are never going to express an actual wrongthink opinion.


I think so. Jordan Peterson…

Sadie Slays

I wish we could skip to the Project Looking Glass shit already.


Remember when Trump spoke to 55K Boy scouts when he was a new President. It was their annual jamboree.
They LOVED him.
And the left lost their mind…….
If they lose the youth, if young men went astray and had a new leader, the tide would turn.
The original “alt right”, young smart mostly males from gamergate started the chans, the meme war, and I’m convinced Trump would never have won without them.
Now, put all that together with Steve Bannon’s relentless quest to PUSH stories into the mainstream media, take back the culture, and we see out answers.
It’s the media.
The media is the problem.


Yes! It is fatiguing as hell to try and figure it all out. But just keeping up and being willing to question EVERYONE and EVERYTHING they say, is an exercise in enlightenment.

Gail Combs

From my old notes: (on my NEW Computer!)
1. “…Children given Ritalin to control hyperactivity could be permanently brain damaged, it was claimed yesterday. Research suggests the controversial ‘chemical cosh’ drug raises the risk of depression and anxiety in adulthood.Ritalin alters the brain’s chemical composition so that it has a lasting effect on mental health, US scientists believe. Because these changes take place while a child’s brain is growing, they could cause irreversible damage….”
2. “In 1996, 10 percent to 12 percent of all American schoolboys were taking the addictive Ritalin.”
3. “The 700% increase in psychostimulant use that occurred in the 1990s justifies concern about potential overdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment of child behavior problems… from the early to mid-1990s the rate of ADHD treatment (i.e., school-administered Ritalin) among white boys in Baltimore County elementary schools was over 15%….”
4. “As many as 20 percent of college students have used Ritalin or Adderall to study, write papers and take exams, according to recent surveys focused on individual campuses. A study released this month by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia found that the number of teenagers who admit to abusing prescription medications tripled from 1992 to 2003, while in the general population such abuse had doubled….

…. there are now over 5 million school kids in America on psychotropic drugs, most of which are prescribed and administered by the schools themselves. ….December 1996, there are four million kids on Ritalin alone, one of the most powerful of the drugs now being given routinely to children in American schools.
What is most disturbing, however, is the growing awareness that the increased violence among school children may have more to do with the drugs than with the guns they use to carry out their violence.
…Eric Harris, 18, who, with his friend Dylan Klebold, murdered his fellow students at Columbine, had been taking Luvox, one of the new antidepressant drugs approved in 1997 by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder, or OCD, among children under 18.
…. T. J. Solomon, 15, who shot and wounded six classmates at Heritage High School in Conyers, Ga., on May 20 was on Ritalin for depression.
Shawn Cooper, 15, who fired two shotgun rounds, narrowly missing students and teachers at his high school in Notus, Idaho, was also on Ritalin, for bipolar disorder.
Kip Kinkel, 15, was on Ritalin and Prozac. He murdered his parents and then went on to school where he fired on students in the cafeteria,…
Mitchell Johnson, the 13-year-old student at Westside Middle School in Jonesboro, Ark., who mowed down several children and a teacher with his friend Andrew Golden, 11, was on some sort of medication since he was being treated by a psychiatrist…..

==>School Shootings Linked to Psychotropic Drugs Such as Ritalin<==
“One parent of a teenage murderer [16-year-old son, Jared] and those who knew him reported major personality changes after taking Ritalin.”
“…in 1973, psychiatrists were giving amphetamines to volunteers in order to observe their reactions. The reactions frightened researchers, who noted that several of the subjects expressed “a desire to kill” or to do something “bad or destructive.”

Gail Combs

If you add in all the different parts….
1. Destruction of the community thanks to the Committee on Economic Development. (1945)
2.Community Mental Health Act turns the mentally ill onto the streets (JFK – 1963)
3. Destruction of the family ( LBJ’s Great Society – 1964)
4. Feminism rears it’s ugly head. (1966 — National Organization for Women (NOW) Founded)
5. Desegregation in schools bring drugs to the middle class kids (Busing – 1971)
6. Westerns and ‘wholesome’ TV shows disappear (1970s)
7. ‘ADHD’ diagnosis takes off 1982 (Ritalin)
….Lots of additional different drugs starting with Adderall in 1996
8. Video games
The first huge hit was Pac-Man arcade game in 1980. In the 1990s that video games really began to take off, especially on computers.

Valerie Curren

One has to at least consider that the underlying “mental/emotional disorders” leading to medicating kids are perhaps more causative of behavioral problems & violence than the medications themselves, per se…
Thanks for all the great research & sharing those links!