If lawmakers and authorities are truly concerned about stopping gun violence in schools, they need to take a close look at the prescription of psychotropic drugs for children and young people, says a leading psychiatrist.
In an exclusive in-person interview in New York City with WND, London-based Dr. David Healy criticized pharmaceutical companies that have made billions of dollars marketing Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, known as SSRIs.
Psychotropic drugs “prescribed for school children cause violent behavior,” Healy stated.
The drugs are widely used in the U.S. as antidepressants by doctors working in the mental health field and increasingly by primary care doctors, he noted....
Unporifitable Servant wrote: "... Michael Winner stated that he had put up memorials to 44 officers and that he believed, "It is almost certain that at least 38 of those [Police Officers] would be alive had they been armed"
Maybe they should reconsider,at least for their officers, those 38 families would have appreciated it.
Since you have not yet had chance to respond with the source data, a search of my own found this: http://www.rollofhonour.org/memorial/memorial_trust/pmt-memorials.htm
The underlying data appears to reflect 1. England only 2. The period 1966 to 2009. 3. Includes an act of war committed by a foreign government. 4. Includes at least 5 others killed by terrorists.
How the late Mr Winner can ascertain that at least 38 of these would be alive if they had been armed is impossible to fathom.
US police officers are armed, and by the late Mr Winner's statistics 86% impervious to these fatalities, so we would expect much better statistics from the USA.
However, US Dept of Justice figures show - 1,820 law enforcement officers were murdered between 1976 and 1998.
The sacrifices of all the fallen should be honoured. Trying to make spurious political capital out of 44 fallen English officers is not honourable.
Abrit wrote: 1. The idea that Jesus telling the disciples to havbe a couple of swords between them going out into the world as it was 2000 years ago. Or the idea that David and Goliath doing battle in the midst of a war - somehow Biblically legislates that nations should arm themselves, against their neighbour, today with automatic assault weapons - is so far from reason and normal rational thinking that it is ludicrous. Never mind lousy exegesis or interpretation. 2. I'm sure that John UK would agree with me that having lived in the UK for over sixty years, now I don't even remember when I last saw a gun or heard of one being used locally in all my years. 3. As for having a community arsenal on every street corner like America does? - We Brits know for a fact that is not the way to apply justice in civilised society. In fact arming everybody American style is lynch mob philosophy!! No wonder the school and kindergarten massacres are regular American events.
Interesting points. Where've you been?
1. This was not the general public but full-time Christian workers who had the swords. Precedent, anyone?
2. Correct, but then we're a more civilised society.
John UK wrote: Who said anything about not protecting a loved one from attack? The issue is whether guns are the right thing to possess; and it may be that the situation in America is vastly different from over here.
The idea that Jesus telling the disciples to havbe a couple of swords between them going out into the world as it was 2000 years ago. Or the idea that David and Goliath doing battle in the midst of a war - somehow Biblically legislates that nations should arm themselves, against their neighbour, today with automatic assault weapons - is so far from reason and normal rational thinking that it is ludicrous. Never mind lousy exegesis or interpretation.
I'm sure that John UK would agree with me that having lived in the UK for over sixty years, now I don't even remember when I last saw a gun or heard of one being used locally in all my years.
As for having a community arsenal on every street corner like America does? - We Brits know for a fact that is not the way to apply justice in civilised society. In fact arming everybody American style is lynch mob philosophy!! No wonder the school and kindergarten massacres are regular American events.
Unporifitable Servant wrote: Hey John, hope all is well. There is a biblical warrant, David's life was threatened by Goliath and he used the WEAPONS AVAILABLE to kill his enemy. We also don't have gun-toting murderers slouching down every sidestreet and boulevard. If you can't use a gun in UK then you can't use one, we don't have that restriction here and you did not used to have it there. Seeing that the powers that be are ordained of God and they have granted us the right to bear arms, then we have here a God given right to bear arms.
All right US, thank you.
Your second point gets to the heart of the matter, but it shows how difficult a matter it is. You have a God-given right, and we do not. Rather odd, but there it is. I would not argue with that.
But your first point is out of kilter surely. The Jews were confronted with the Phillistines; it was a war. The Phillistines, not wanting to lose a lot of good men, offered a single combat with Goliath and whoever won, won the war and took the spoils. David voluntarily took the challenge and went out without sword or armour. Foolish whippersnapper! Ah but he went out in the name of Jehovah and a boy's catapult.
Unporifitable Servant wrote: Hey John, hope all is well. There is a biblical warrant, David's life was threatened by Goliath and he used the WEAPONS AVAILABLE to kill his enemy. We also don't have gun-toting murderers slouching down every sidestreet and boulevard. If you can't use a gun in UK then you can't use one, we don't have that restriction here and you did not used to have it there. Seeing that the powers that be are ordained of God and they have granted us the right to bear arms, then we have here a God given right to bear arms. Meanwhile in the UK, "In 2010, following the serious injury of an unarmed officer in a knife attack, the chairman of the Police Memorial Trust, Michael Winner stated that he had put up memorials to 44 officers and that he believed, "It is almost certain that at least 38 of those [Police Officers] would be alive had they been armed" Maybe they should reconsider,at least for their officers, those 38 families would have appreciated it.
And in the interests of balance, how many US police officers have been killed by firearms in the same time period as those 44?
John UK wrote: It is important to have a biblical warrant...
Hey John, hope all is well. There is a biblical warrant, David's life was threatened by Goliath and he used the WEAPONS AVAILABLE to kill his enemy. We also don't have gun-toting murderers slouching down every sidestreet and boulevard. If you can't use a gun in UK then you can't use one, we don't have that restriction here and you did not used to have it there. Seeing that the powers that be are ordained of God and they have granted us the right to bear arms, then we have here a God given right to bear arms. Meanwhile in the UK, "In 2010, following the serious injury of an unarmed officer in a knife attack, the chairman of the Police Memorial Trust, Michael Winner stated that he had put up memorials to 44 officers and that he believed, "It is almost certain that at least 38 of those [Police Officers] would be alive had they been armed" Maybe they should reconsider,at least for their officers, those 38 families would have appreciated it.
Luke 22:36: “Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”
I know. I know. You biblically literate skeptics are going to cite Matthew 26:52-54 – how Jesus responded when Peter used his sword to cut off the ear of a servant of the high priest: “Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?”
Read those verses in context and they support my position. Jesus told Peter he would be committing suicide to choose a fight in this situation – as well as undermining God’s plan to allow Jesus’ death on the cross and resurrection.
Jesus told Peter to put his sword in its place – at his side. He didn’t say throw it away. After all, He had just ordered the disciples to arm themselves. The reason for the arms was obviously to protect the lives of the disciples, not the life of the Son of God. What Jesus was saying was: “Peter, this is not the right time for a fight.”
AH now wrote: But if a loved one is threatened by a gun totting murderer and you have the opportunity to defend with a gun, do make sure that you have a biblical warrant before reaching for the gun for defense.
It is important to have a biblical warrant, because then you have the approbation of God. If you want to do what is right in your own eyes, that is up to you. But if the Lord sent you as a missionary to the UK (oh dear ) will you bring your gun with you? I rather think customs will confiscate it.
How on earth will you then protect yourself from all the gun-toting murderers in the UK? Oh, I nearly forgot, we don't have gun-toting murderers slouching down every sidestreet and boulevard.
But then, if you really believed it was a God-given right to bear arms, you'd have a good case to prevent the capture of your gun by violence, which would mean shooting the customs official and anyone else who got in your way, making YOU the rare gun-toting murderer in the UK.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: There is a biblical warrant, David's life was threatened by Goliath and he used the weapons available to kill his enemy. Also, are you saying we must have a Biblical warrant for everything we do?? Like where is the one for brushing your teeth?? Trying to make sure I understand.
Was said tongue in cheek to John UK.
But since you ask, are you saying that brushing teeth and taking a life are morally equivalent so that we don't need a biblical warrant for either?
AH now wrote: But if a loved one is threatened by a gun totting murderer and you have the opportunity to defend with a gun, do make sure that you have a biblical warrant before reaching for the gun for defense.
There is a biblical warrant, David's life was threatened by Goliath and he used the weapons available to kill his enemy. Also, are you saying we must have a Biblical warrant for everything we do?? Like where is the one for brushing your teeth?? Trying to make sure I understand.
John UK wrote: Who said anything about not protecting a loved one from attack? The issue is whether guns are the right thing to possess; and it may be that the situation in America is vastly different from over here.
But if a loved one is threatened by a gun totting murderer and you have the opportunity to defend with a gun, do make sure that you have a biblical warrant before reaching for the gun for defense.
Mike wrote: Somehow the idea of not protecting a loved one from attack seems more like fatalism than protecting them should be reckoned as pragmatism.
Who said anything about not protecting a loved one from attack? The issue is whether guns are the right thing to possess; and it may be that the situation in America is vastly different from over here.
John UK wrote: Sure you can interject Mike - no problem. I don't know if you've noticed, but all posts on this come down to pragmaticism rather than biblical precedents. If I was to do this on any other subject, I would soon be shot down. So what makes the difference? What I'm looking for, especially when you consider that the first century was a most dangerous time to be a Christian, is an example of when the disciples were attacked and they fought back and took someone's life, because they did not believe God would protect them. Also, if I went out and bought a gun and used it to protect my property, I myself would be arrested. What then?
Somehow the idea of not protecting a loved one from attack seems more like fatalism than protecting them should be reckoned as pragmatism.
John UK wrote: I don't know if you've noticed, but all posts on this come down to pragmaticism rather than biblical precedents. If I was to do this on any other subject, I would soon be shot down. So what makes the difference?
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
I am still thinking about it, and I am glad to see you used some scripture.
I just discovered Ryle's commentary online.
So far, this is the only text provided by proponents for bearing arms:
Luke 22:36 KJV 36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
Ryle says, "We shall do well to lay to heart our Lord's words in this place, and to act habitually on the principle which they contain. Let us labor, and toil, and give, and speak, and act, and write for Christ, as if all depended on our exertions. And yet let us never forget that success depends entirely on God's blessing! To expect success by our own "purse" and "sword" is pride and self-righteousness. But to expect success without the "purse and sword" is presumption and fanaticism. Let us do as Jacob did when he met his brother Esau. He used all innocent means to conciliate and appease him. But when he had done all, he spent all night in prayer. (Gen. 32:1-24.)"
p.s. I looked at MH as you suggested but could not find anything relevant.
I tend to agree with Christopher. Perhaps this text will provide what you seek....
Rom 2:14-15 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;
In this context, perhaps the natural law (Christian instincts, if you will) answers those difficult questions which could not be explicitly answered 2,000 years ago even though God foreknew them. It may be helpful to see what Matthew Henry has to say about this text.
I just feel like God expects us to use our common sense and protect ourselves as opposed to being slaughtered without mercy like sheep. I feel, at this point, like it's ok to defend ourselves and/or prepare for the worst case scenarios because the Bible, as far as I've read in the posts here and elsewhere, really doesn't cover today on this topic. I could sit here right now and stab myself in the neck, bleed out, and die. I'm choosing not to because I have common sense, the common sense that God gave me and expects me to use. I think God knows when each of us will die, of course, but I don't believe that blanket statements of "well, it was his/her time" are really valid, and never have. I think we can protect ourselves and live, or stand there like a deer in the headlights snd hasten our demise. I think we can choose to extend our lives in certain situations, which is where the common sense part comes into play.
21
There are a total of 100 user comments displayed | add new comment |
COMMENTS | 
) will you bring your gun with you? I rather think customs will confiscate it. 
jim lincoln from nebraska: "yes, tablets are seductive devices :annoyed: the..."
