Every single time there is a school shooting, or some senseless massacre, the press are quick to start touting the need for more mental health treatment to prevent these tragedieswell before the facts of the case have been investigated. In fact, most of the press dont appear as interested in bringing the facts to light as they are in making recommendations based on assumptions and calling for more mental health services/treatments. How one can make recommendations before finding out what actually occurred seems illogical to us, and were hoping were not the only ones. What also seems illogical is the lack of direct questioning and demand for answers given the facts already known about prior massacres/shootings, such as: The majority of those who committed such acts had already undergone mental health treatment, and were already on psychiatric drugs. Drugs documented by international drug regulatory agencies to cause violence, mania, psychosis, hallucinations, suicide and even homicidal ideation.
In the case of prior massacres/shootings, what has repeatedly occurred is that when the facts finally came out, due solely to the efforts of those few determined investigative reporters (such as Fox National News reporter Douglas Kennedy), and it was revealed that the shooter had been under the influence of psychiatric drugs, or in withdrawal from them, most of the press were quick to counter the drug/violence connection by featuring some Pharma mouthpiece touting the there is no evidence that these drugs cause violent or homicidal behavior line.
Really? No evidence? There have been 22 International Drug Regulatory Agency Warnings on psychiatric drugs causing violence, mania, psychosis and even homicidal ideation. These warnings have been issued by drug regulatory agencies in the United States, the European Union, Japan, The United Kingdom, Australia and Canada.