Ugh. Not again.
Ugh. Not again.
Spoke with a buddy who lives on King, he said it's crazy the amount of cops around, but that no one he's spoken to said they heard any shots fired.
Hope it's nothing and everyone is safe.
I still call it The Jake.
A diner said the unidentified armed man, dressed as a kitchen staff member, locked the front door and announced, "I am the new king of Charleston."
Access to mental healthcare in this country is crap.
Originally Posted by blurred
^^^^ so true unfortunately.
Mental health in this country is a huge stigma and is very low on the funding priority for insurance providers. It seems it's easier and more profitable for our country to criminalize mental health rather than treat it. Not to say that mental healthcare doesn't have it's issues, I'm kind of glad we aren't doing what we did for mental care back in the 50's, 60's and 70's, locking people up and throwing them in loony bins. Also not saying that every mental health issue really needs to be treated. The incidence of ADHD and OCD and other "diseases" hasn't been helped by drug manufacturers and media, just helping themselves.
x4 now.
You would think with 50 states somebody would have come up with a decent mental health system by now.
It wasn't until the 50s/60s that healthcare had any tools whatsoever to deal with the problems that caused most institutionalizations: bipolar, depression, schizophrenia, OCD, etc... we literally could do nothing for these people other than house them, feed them, keep them from self-harm.
Only with the miracle of psychopharmaceuticals did we start to get some of these institutionalized people out... and those miracles were crude AF. More drugs, less crude tools, made it better and the deinstitutionalization went wild... everyone out into the community! It overshot its mark I think... but the pendulum never swung back and the community based care never met its prime for one simple reason.
Nobody wants to pay to help these patients.
There aren't enough providers anyways.
And as @mtnjam said, stigma is a humongous barrier and as @jackstraw mentioned, its difficult enough to get folks who need help to agree to it.
I think I'll do something to help.
Originally Posted by blurred
I don't know why they call them "active" shooters. Most of them are just lazy losers with a gun.
The Sheriff is near!
The Columbine shooters were on and off mental kid drugs...reading the side effects of these things should frighten anyone. Suicidal and violent thoughts and actions, etc, etc. Big pharma is complicit in many of these kids going off the rails and taking out a school.
But big pharma isn't going to get their hands slapped since they 'lobby' (ie bribe) congress with 80 times more cash than does the NRA.
And it ain't polyass since it's fact.
Got me wondering....is an active shooter worse than just a shooter? Why is the word 'active' needed? Or simply media drama?
Bookmarks