I'm not sure if the statements made are 100% correct, but there is some truth to them.
[snip]
He was prescribed medication for extreme paranoia, but supposedly had not been taking it. He and the room-mates that were murdered were living together at Independent Living Institute in Santa Barbara, a facility that offers “living skills instruction to help adults with disabilities to live more independently in their communities,” according to the website.
He did come from a "broken home":
[snip]
In his written "manifesto", "He revealed that he was obsessed with video games"
Here was what Gary originally said:
We all feel bad about the tragic loss of lives, but the full story about the nut that did this, is most likely over medication from years of being in the public school system, with doctors making money right and left, pumping these kids full of meds, that do more harm than good. The kid is allowed to play video games 120 hours a w week, no job, no responcibilities, most likely a broken home, and when the kid explodes, people blame guns.
You'll note the difference is that Gary said the public school systems caused him to be given lots of drugs that he didn't need with doctors making money off it----and the case seems to be rather the opposite, that he should have been on meds but wasn't. Which had nothing to do with a public school system, nor were any doctors to blame.
And calling a divorce and remarriage a "broken home" makes little sense. Similarly, "allowed to play video games 120 hours a week" is very different from "likes video games".
And in the end, "no job" and "no responsibilities" has very little to do with a kid deciding to suddenly murder lots of people. Because oddly enough, many kids each year from much worse situations manage to NOT kill lots of people.
Again, the initial statement made as little sense as blaming the NRA, and was based on just as little logic foundation.
I am not on medication, but someone always dogging other forum members, can they say that?
As the post above shows, some of us are connected to reality.
Right, right, always dogging others. Or maybe, just calling people on nonsense that not only is incorrect, but sometimes is actively wrong (as in wrong enough to cause a problem) or calling out people who play a blame game based on no facts at all.
I like the "medication" crack there, too, but I suppose it shouldn't surprise me, as you don't ever seem to be able to back up what you say, instead preferring to make personal attacks or attempt metaphors that make no sense.
Still teaching people to disassemble their carry firearms with one hand and place the parts in a baggie on the dashboard in the time it takes to coast to a stop when pulled over by a police officer on the highway, Gary? (I'll note for people who've joined recently, this CAN'T be a personal attack on Gary, because when asked, he stated for the record that this is what he does, and the police appreciate it, and he thinks this is a good idea.)
Back to the original topic:
How about we place the blame squarely where it belongs, which is on the kid who decided that his little duck feelings were more important than other people's lives, and acted on it. Oh wait---he isn't a "kid" even though people are characterizing him that way. He was 22---an adult, in college.
And he chose to be a vile pathetic murderer. There may have been contributing factors to his actions---but in the end, he made his choices, and HE is to blame.
