Share this
- Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
- Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky
- Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
- Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
- Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Print (Opens in new window) Print
ventrellaquest.com 
Reblogged this on myatheistlife and commented:
How many of the last 10 years of mass killings have been committed by folk who literally and figuratively should have already been in an institution for the mentally derranged?
Do we need anti-terrorism laws or do we need better, cheaper health care? Mr Legislator, are you listening?
LikeLike
You’re suggesting we don’t need anti-terrorism laws?
Note that the single difference between the five people in the lineup is that four of them – Newtown, Aurora, VA Tech, and Tucson – were individuals acting entirely on their own; when they were stopped, it ended. Only the Boston bombers had the possibility that they were connected to a terrorist organization. And once that possibility had been demonstrated not to be so, the surviving bomber fell into the category of the other four.
Cheaper health care doesn’t solve any of those problems. Improved early identification and treatment does, but “cheaper” implies that these individuals did not seek medical/psychiatric help because they couldn’t afford it. That has not shown to be the case.
LikeLike