Violence Prevention Research

[TorchRedTulsan]

I'm going to kick this off with a few caveats:

Mods - Starting this under the Activism banner. If there's a better subforum, great.
Context - @The Resister made mention in the Bidens Plan to End Violence thread that he had 40 years of research on ways to end gun violence. Rather than derail that thread, I wanted to learn about this apart from the other conversations happening over there.
Please don't get this locked - Apart from the obvious stated rules of the forum, I'm amazed that some can't seem to recognize that there are a few newer members who excel in pushing other's buttons until a thread gets locked. The friendly reminder is that we remain excellent to each other and any politics are 2A related.

Okay @The Resister. The floor is yours to provide the data, findings, or opinion from your research.

Read More

 

[The Resister]

I'm going to kick this off with a few caveats:

Mods - Starting this under the Activism banner. If there's a better subforum, great.
Context - @The Resister made mention in the Bidens Plan to End Violence thread that he had 40 years of research on ways to end gun violence. Rather than derail that thread, I wanted to learn about this apart from the other conversations happening over there.
Please don't get this locked - Apart from the obvious stated rules of the forum, I'm amazed that some can't seem to recognize that there are a few newer members who excel in pushing other's buttons until a thread gets locked. The friendly reminder is that we remain excellent to each other and any politics are 2A related.

Okay @The Resister. The floor is yours to provide the data, findings, or opinion from your research.

I am trying to extrapolate the most important things from a large collection of data generated since 1989. I will try to have some posts up by Friday evening. It's going to take up a bit of space, so I will post it in segments to make it readable and allow others to call me out when necessary. Thanks and hope it helps.

 

[TorchRedTulsan]

I am trying to extrapolate the most important things from a large collection of data generated since 1989. I will try to have some posts up by Friday evening. It's going to take up a bit of space, so I will post it in segments to make it readable and allow others to call me out when necessary. Thanks and hope it helps.

Digestible chunks sound great. Looking forward to learning

 

[No_Regerts]

Digestible chunks sound great. Looking forward to learning

I just had some digested chunks.

 

[TorchRedTulsan]

I just had some digested chunks.

 

[The Resister]

The Resister's Plan to End Gun Violence

Warning - this is probably the longest post on this board

Every year around 40,000 people die due to firearms. Some of it cannot be avoided. The police have to shoot criminals; civilians have to protect life or limb. Still, that's a lot of people. And, unfortunately, the left wants gun control and they misrepresent their position because they are not against death or violence. They are only concerned with gun violence, so they carefully frame their arguments, but they never deny that it is a gun control argument. It's not about reducing the numbers of people who get shot or die. Before I unveil my plan, it is important that you note the distinction between prevention and control.

Prevention means that the violence, most likely will not happen to begin with. Control means we deal with the problem after the fact. Unfortunately most gun owners and all the gun Rights groups are always fighting a defensive war, never focused on taking away the left's argument. We believe in Liberty and Liberty comes with a price. People drink. People drive. Drunk drivers kill people. We accept the risk to retain the Liberty.

Okay, so the big question is, WHY do people kill their fellow man? The list would be drug related, domestic abuse, suicide and mass shootings. Deal with the root of the problem and you can eliminate the problem. I'm going to focus on mass shooting as I know, for a fact that we can virtually eliminate mass shootings and, in the process, significantly reduce the other gun violence. And I'm going to do it without ANY kind of gun control. I can do it without raising taxes; do it without any more bureaucratic agencies.. I'll save you tax money.

The United States has the most number of people killed by firearms. So, if you get rid of guns, you get rid of the problem. Right? Wrong. You already know the arguments. So, let me tell you about mass shooters – and by the way, some people that shoot only one or two people will share the same traits as a mass shooter. I will start with mass shooters, later deal with the others so be patient.

The United States not only holds the distinction of having the most firearm related deaths, but the most drug addicts and the most people in the world in jails or prisons. Americans consume over 80 percent of the world's opioid supply . The problem begins with parents, schools, doctors, government actions, and Big Pharma.

Much of the problem begins in grade school where an unruly child is being given Ritalin or Adderall as a first option. The system wants to medicate everyone so they come up with phony conditions (for the most part) that they call ADD / ADHD. This mindset then follows the child through later years where doctors insist on giving children drugs for anxiety or depression. Here, kids get introduced to SSRIs. SSRIs are Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors. That's a fancy name for antidepressants like Celexa, Lexapro, Prozac, Zoloft, Luvox, Paxil or some other more recent name.

In a nutshell, the first problem our society has is that we head for the pill bottle as the first option in treating outward symptoms. In doing so, we create drug addicts, violence prone individuals, and mass murderers. I focus on mass shooters because virtually ALL of them have been under the recent care of a psychologist, psychiatrist, and nearly ALL of them were on SSRIs.

Add to that, once a child is not getting their medication, they will turn to illegal drugs. But, that is the root of the problem. Most of those kids were turned into drug addicts way back in grade school. Our society created them. We cannot get rid of SSRIs as they are useful in more cases than they are harmful. Additionally, after we've created drug addicts, we toss them in prisons. For every drug addict in a mental health facility, more than TEN are in prison.

 

[The Resister]

On my birthday in 1989 (January 17) a guy named Patrick Purdy took an AK style rifle and went to an elementary school where he killed five children and wounded thirty nine more. I began studying Patrick Purdy and have looked at every mass shooting in the United States since that happened. I can account for all but 3 shootings during those 22 years. At the end of the day, there is a list of things that EVERY mass shooter has in common. I've identified 16 commonalities that identify mass shooters. As a matter of fact, once a person meets any 8 of the markers, there is a 100 percent chance they WILL commit an act of violence. Here are those 16 markers if these markers are done in conjunction with SSRIs:

1) White males ages 17 to 40

2) Previously diagnosed with ADD / ADHD

3) Parents are divorced / separated (Latch key child)

4) Has a fascination with violence (violent video games, drawing violence laden pictures, fascinated by the macabre) There is chaos, violence, dysfunction in the home to the point it has been reported to police (especially mental, sexual, or violence related complaints)

5) Has seen a psychologist and / or psychiatrist for depression or anxiety 6) One or both parents are alcoholics / drug addicts

7) There is a history of violence in the home

8) The police are called routinely to report the child (generally for acts of violence including, but not limited to hurting or killing small animals, bullying, fights with siblings, posting violent content on social media, acts of vandalism, altercations with neighbors)

9) Expulsions and / or suspensions from school due to violent activity

10) Reported to the police for threats, stalking, inappropriate violent / sexual remarks, invasions of privacy

11) Illegal drug usage / participation in gangs

12) Completely introverted and a social outcast that has been rejected for dates

13) History of rejection

14) The custodial parent has had run ins with local law enforcement more than twice

15) A child has reported to school officials, a teacher or law enforcement that the individual has done something threatening, demeaning, or suggestive

16) The child has a fascination with satanic subject matter; dresses the part

You can generally determine a child's future by the age of 14. Past performance dictates future behavior. So, the $64,000 question is, what do you do once you've identified the people who are going to become violent?

 

[The Resister]

The Solution to addressing this is one where you must know the difference between civil law and criminal law. The average layman may initially reject this plan as they don't know the difference and what I'm proposing, the authorities already have the power to do.

As stated, if a child reaches half of the markers, they WILL commit an act of violence. So, step ONE is to get America out of the drug culture. When a very young child is "acting out," and / or being hyperactive – or maybe cannot concentrate, doctors should not treat the symptoms. They should look for the root cause. It does little to NO good giving a child Ritalin or Adderall when the REAL problem may be a bad diet, lack of exercise, too much computer time, bad sleeping habits, chaos in the home, lack of parenting skills, lack of discipline, illegal drugs / alcohol in the home, mental / sexual /physical abuse or any combination thereof.

In any event, drugs should be the LAST option. BEFORE any child is given drugs all of the things in the previous paragraph should be explored via consultations with a therapist to correct and address any and all of the above. If, after a few months of therapy fail, then at least two months of family therapy should be utilized in order to study the family dynamic. Almost anyone trained to work with kids can probably figure out if they're dealing with an emotional disorder or the wrong atmosphere in the home. You can't fix bad parenting skills with a pill.

If personal and family therapy do not resolve the issue and you rule out the most likely reasons a child is unruly, then and only then are drugs warranted.

At some point a LOT of kids are put on SSRIs. These drugs are handed out like candy. The key to getting these drugs is to tell a doctor that you have been thinking about hurting yourself or others; you've contemplated suicide or want to injure or kill someone else. That gets the kids an automatic prescription for SSRIs.

This is where a civil intervention is warranted. BEFORE any child is put on SSRIs, they should undergo one on one counseling, then family counseling, and group therapy over the period of 6 to 9 months in order to determine the root cause of the problem, paying close attention to the 16 markers dealing with numbers 2 through 16 and taking them off the list. If some things cannot be taken off the list, the child may need to be placed in protective custody and raised in an appropriate environment.

The way we uncover those children who need help is to tie their student ID to their National ID Number. You may know it as the Socialist Surveillance Number …ooops, I mean "Social Security Number." I don't like National ID, but if we have it, use it. Anyway, every time a child has an interaction with a police agency, welfare agency, generates a disciplinary action at school, or any other report that is put into a government database, once 3 of the remaining 15 markers are met, a computer generated alarm lets a Special Unit know and they act immediately. What happens next will make a lot of difference.









.

 

[The Resister]

When a child meets any 3 markers on the list a report is generated with a Special Unit in each county and they respond within 72 hours. They begin by interviewing the child and alerting the parents. The parents would also be given information as to where to go for help and each county would provide the help so that there is no confusion as to who does what. The help would consist of parenting classes, a drug test / IQ test / aptitude test for the child, enrolling the child in a Big brother / Big sister program if it is a latch key child. There would be access to one on one, family, and / or group therapy.

If, within 45 days, the child generates even one more report, the Special Unit would meet with the child and a drug test / IQ test / aptitude test would become mandatory. The child would then be required to enroll in therapy where the therapists would then be charged with trying to determine if the problem is the child or the parents. A member of the Special Unit would then show up at the home of the child to interview the parents and ask for permission to come in and inspect the premises and interview the family. The interviewer would be looking for signs of abuse in the home, the cleanliness, and the ability of the parent to parent their child. Anything that relates to the markers (save of the race of the child) would be looked at and a plan of action is suggested with the warning that a future violation would become very serious.

If within the next 45 days a child generates another report, the Special Unit comes in and focuses on the family. A police background check would be performed on the parents and any person 18 or over living in the house. If required, the interviewer could demand to inspect the house, interview the parents and conduct any tests necessary to determine their fitness to parent. If the child or the parent needs counseling or therapy, it is mandatory at this level. Failure to comply means that the child will be removed from the home. If the parents and / or child is not getting the requisite help and the parents resist, then the child goes into a group home or foster home.

Most of the time we know who is going to commit an act of violence, especially after repeated contact with law enforcement and / or the child being expelled or suspended from school. Nicholas Cruz had at least 25 and maybe as many as 45 interactions with school officials and law enforcement before committing the Parkland, Florida mass shooting. Adam Lanza, who killed 26 people (20 of which were young children), confirms what I have concluded about mass shooters. According to Wikipedia:

"The Report of the Office of the Child Advocate concluded: "There was not one thing that was necessarily the tipping point driving Lanza to commit the Sandy Hook shooting. Rather there was a cascade of events, many self-imposed, that included: loss of school; absence of work; disruption of the relationship with his one friend; virtually no personal contact with family; virtually total and increasing isolation; fear of losing his home and of a change in his relationship with Mrs. Lanza, his only caretaker and connection; worsening OCD; depression and anxiety; profound and possibly worsening anorexia; and an increasing obsession with mass murder occurring in the total absence of any engagement with the outside world. Adam increasingly lived in an alternate universe in which ruminations about mass shootings were his central preoccupation. The authors also noted that despite multiple developmental and mental health problems, Lanza had not received adequate mental health treatment. They wrote: "It is fair to surmise that, had Lanza's mental illness been adequately treated in the last years of his life, one predisposing factor to the tragedy of Sandy Hook might have been mitigated" Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting - Wikipedia

Great ideas, but where do we find the money for it? I'll address that and then move to the ways we address other shooters.

 

[The Resister]

Let's face it, by the time a school day ends, you still have from 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. and week-ends where the space in public schools is not being used. The same manpower being expended making endless reports and sending police out on calls could be converted into parenting classes, therapy, and keeping up with the daily progress of problem children.

During these meetings, children would have access to Big brother / Big sister programs; access to therapists; access to group therapy – in short opportunities to resolve their conflicts. The rent for the buildings is already paid and you're only shifting manpower from law enforcement to problem resolution. You're giving parents access to resources so that they can learn how to address their problems, get help, and network with other parents in the same situation. From grade school to the end of high school, we can provide an alternative to popping a pill to solve problems and significantly reduce firearm violence.

You say, yeah but a lot of people are going to fall through the cracks and still end up in jail or prison. So, let's shift gears and help these people. We are either going to have to build a lot of mental health facilities or do the prevention program from earlier. Implementing the above program is going to help people later in life so there are fewer criminals. But, we will have to alter our thinking on this end as well. Currently we have more people in jails and prisons than any country on the globe. There are so many that career criminals can tell you how many months it will take for them to get back out on the streets, regardless of the YEARS they were sentenced to. I have a family member by marriage that has it down to a science. He was sentenced to 8 years on a felony. Additionally, he was supposed to do community service, pay fines, go to violence counseling, and report to a probation officer. He did NONE of those things. Additionally, he was picked up for stealing a Coke from Walmart and another time for having a joint. He spent a total of nine weeks in jail over the course of four years (both stints were for probation violations).

My idea is that if I were in charge, there would be NO early release. If a person is sentenced to 10 years, they do 10 years. They can earn time off for early release. For instance, if a person gets a GED, that would knock off 2 years of their sentence. If they got training in a transferable job skill, that could take as much as 2 years off their sentence. Drug rehab classes, violence counseling and courses in subjects like interviewing and getting a job, getting an apartment or home, building credit, planning a budget, balancing a checkbook, cleaning a house, conflict resolution and diet / eating healthy could net time off their sentence. A 10 year sentence could come down to 30 months if the prisoner availed themselves of the course and passed the testing.

Now that we've dealt with those who are most likely to commit an act of violence and briefly touched on the rehabilitation of prisoners, I can give you a couple of quick ideas on the other major causes of firearms deaths: domestic violence and job related firearm deaths.

Getting a marriage license is not a right; a license is a privilege. Look up the word license in a legal dictionary. Just because someone applies does not mean it's an automatic guarantee. Therefore, before a couple gets married, they should be required to take some marriage counseling and over the period of a month that counseling ought to include sessions that make people face the harsh questions they will ultimately face. What is their view on abortion? If one makes more money than the other, are they the boss? How are they going to handle finances? What are their plans for raising children? If they face the hard questions before getting married, a lot of them will forego getting married.

On the job shootings are next in line. I think that after a person has put their time into a company, that individual should be vested in the company and the same rules that protect government workers should extend to corporations. This means no harassment, firing must be done only when there is just cause, and if an employee is being abused in any way, they should have recourse through the company and into the courts if necessary. It should not be because someone is a certain color or religion - or any of those protected classes. It has to apply to every person in the workforce. That is my rant. Time for you to swear at me.

 

[ma96782]

The Resister's Plan to End Gun Violence

Warning - this is probably the longest post on this board

Every year around 40,000 people die due to firearms. Some of it cannot be avoided. The police have to shoot criminals; civilians have to protect life or limb. Still, that's a lot of people. And, unfortunately, the left wants gun control and they misrepresent their position because they are not against death or violence. They are only concerned with gun violence, so they carefully frame their arguments, but they never deny that it is a gun control argument. It's not about reducing the numbers of people who get shot or die. Before I unveil my plan, it is important that you note the distinction between prevention and control.

Prevention means that the violence, most likely will not happen to begin with. Control means we deal with the problem after the fact. Unfortunately most gun owners and all the gun Rights groups are always fighting a defensive war, never focused on taking away the left's argument. We believe in Liberty and Liberty comes with a price. People drink. People drive. Drunk drivers kill people. We accept the risk to retain the Liberty.

Okay, so the big question is, WHY do people kill their fellow man? The list would be drug related, domestic abuse, suicide and mass shootings. Deal with the root of the problem and you can eliminate the problem. I'm going to focus on mass shooting as I know, for a fact that we can virtually eliminate mass shootings and, in the process, significantly reduce the other gun violence. And I'm going to do it without ANY kind of gun control. I can do it without raising taxes; do it without any more bureaucratic agencies.. I'll save you tax money.

The United States has the most number of people killed by firearms. So, if you get rid of guns, you get rid of the problem. Right? Wrong. You already know the arguments. So, let me tell you about mass shooters – and by the way, some people that shoot only one or two people will share the same traits as a mass shooter. I will start with mass shooters, later deal with the others so be patient.

The United States not only holds the distinction of having the most firearm related deaths, but the most drug addicts and the most people in the world in jails or prisons. Americans consume over 80 percent of the world's opioid supply . The problem begins with parents, schools, doctors, government actions, and Big Pharma.

Much of the problem begins in grade school where an unruly child is being given Ritalin or Adderall as a first option. The system wants to medicate everyone so they come up with phony conditions (for the most part) that they call ADD / ADHD. This mindset then follows the child through later years where doctors insist on giving children drugs for anxiety or depression. Here, kids get introduced to SSRIs. SSRIs are Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors. That's a fancy name for antidepressants like Celexa, Lexapro, Prozac, Zoloft, Luvox, Paxil or some other more recent name.

In a nutshell, the first problem our society has is that we head for the pill bottle as the first option in treating outward symptoms. In doing so, we create drug addicts, violence prone individuals, and mass murderers. I focus on mass shooters because virtually ALL of them have been under the recent care of a psychologist, psychiatrist, and nearly ALL of them were on SSRIs.

Add to that, once a child is not getting their medication, they will turn to illegal drugs. But, that is the root of the problem. Most of those kids were turned into drug addicts way back in grade school. Our society created them. We cannot get rid of SSRIs as they are useful in more cases than they are harmful. Additionally, after we've created drug addicts, we toss them in prisons. For every drug addict in a mental health facility, more than TEN are in prison.

BUT......If, just one life can be saved????

Aloha, Mark

 

[No_Regerts]

In many ways, a lot of the ideas you mention, especially in regards to sentencing and prisons, are already in effect and have marginal outcomes. One thing to look into is "evidence based practices". I was looking at a chart that showed recidivism rates over a 40 year period and program expenditure. Oddly enough, increased program spending did not result in a decrease in recidivism. Looking at the years, the recidivism rates were mostly linked to the economy and employment numbers.

There are protective factors that are proven as "evidence based". These things are essentially what you mentioned and are proven to impact risk.

This would be a great conversation to have!

 

[The Resister]

In many ways, a lot of the ideas you mention, especially in regards to sentencing and prisons, are already in effect and have marginal outcomes. One thing to look into is "evidence based practices". I was looking at a chart that showed recidivism rates over a 40 year period and program expenditure. Oddly enough, increased program spending did not result in a decrease in recidivism. Looking at the years, the recidivism rates were mostly linked to the economy and employment numbers.

There are protective factors that are proven as "evidence based". These things are essentially what you mentioned and are proven to impact risk.

This would be a great conversation to have!

By all means, go ahead. Most of the programs you say are in place are in areas where they still give people time off for good behavior (sic). There is no incentive to do good there. Secondly, we're talking prevention. Joe Biden was one of those kind of dolts that thought gun control a good idea, so he supported the Lautenberg Amendment. So, what the Lautenberg Amendment is consists of a law that says if you've ever been convicted of a "violent misdemeanor," you can never own a firearm again. If that were such a great freaking idea, how come it didn't pass on its own, but rather tied to legislation that didn't have squat to do with firearms? Adding insult to injury, that law (and many more) are unconstitutional and ineffective, plus way too political. Case in point: A neighbor close to where I live had a verbal argument at the kitchen table years ago. Then his wife wouldn't get off the phone, so my neighbor yanked the telephone cord out of of the wall. The wife's sister called police. When police arrived, the couple were at the kitchen table, still arguing. The telephone cord was all they needed to convict the guy and now he'll never own a gun again for the rest of his life. Some people try to defend outrages like that.

No, the Lautenberg Amendment is a tool, like many, that are used to disenfranchise people who go to prison. Amy Coney Barrett could tell you all about taking felons Rights, especially gun Rights when the crime didn't have anything to do with a firearm. That is why she criticized the phony "conservatives" like Scalia on the Supreme Court. Before you can take someone's Rights, the punishment must be related to the crime. That's her position. Mine is a bit more radical. Once a person has paid the fine, done the time, been rehabilitated, then made restitution, they should return to society with all their Rights intact. This we do not do so there is no incentive for anyone to work hard to get out of prison due to that criminal record. So, the gun lobby has to step up to the plate and reject ALL infringements in toto in order for my ideas to have a chance.

Spending money on programs does not reduce risk. I would never argue such a position. That is why I said, in the beginning, I will not ask for additional tax dollars nor new bureaucracies. You simply change the focus of where the money is spent. The programs you allude to are pumping money into a bureaucratic program that ends up with marginal outcomes because the program itself is marginally implemented. If you'll look really hard, all those people did in the past was to throw more money into some half bubblegum measure, hire some more bureaucrats and get a predictable outcome. I wouldn't want money for the program. Let inmates teach inmates. One kid has no education, let a white collar criminal help him get a GED. The white collar criminal earns early release time for the successes he or she has in helping their students get the GED.

Governors of states could help by giving businesses that offer a second chance to those coming out of prison with tax incentives in order to make it work. Give a guy a second chance, get tax credits.

 

[No_Regerts]

By all means, go ahead. Most of the programs you say are in place are in areas where they still give people time off for good behavior (sic). There is no incentive to do good there. Secondly, we're talking prevention. Joe Biden was one of those kind of dolts that thought gun control a good idea, so he supported the Lautenberg Amendment. So, what the Lautenberg Amendment is consists of a law that says if you've ever been convicted of a "violent misdemeanor," you can never own a firearm again. If that were such a great freaking idea, how come it didn't pass on its own, but rather tied to legislation that didn't have squat to do with firearms? Adding insult to injury, that law (and many more) are unconstitutional and ineffective, plus way too political. Case in point: A neighbor close to where I live had a verbal argument at the kitchen table years ago. Then his wife wouldn't get off the phone, so my neighbor yanked the telephone cord out of of the wall. The wife's sister called police. When police arrived, the couple were at the kitchen table, still arguing. The telephone cord was all they needed to convict the guy and now he'll never own a gun again for the rest of his life. Some people try to defend outrages like that.

No, the Lautenberg Amendment is a tool, like many, that are used to disenfranchise people who go to prison. Amy Coney Barrett could tell you all about taking felons Rights, especially gun Rights when the crime didn't have anything to do with a firearm. That is why she criticized the phony "conservatives" like Scalia on the Supreme Court. Before you can take someone's Rights, the punishment must be related to the crime. That's her position. Mine is a bit more radical. Once a person has paid the fine, done the time, been rehabilitated, then made restitution, they should return to society with all their Rights intact. This we do not do so there is no incentive for anyone to work hard to get out of prison due to that criminal record. So, the gun lobby has to step up to the plate and reject ALL infringements in toto in order for my ideas to have a chance.

Spending money on programs does not reduce risk. I would never argue such a position. That is why I said, in the beginning, I will not ask for additional tax dollars nor new bureaucracies. You simply change the focus of where the money is spent. The programs you allude to are pumping money into a bureaucratic program that ends up with marginal outcomes because the program itself is marginally implemented. If you'll look really hard, all those people did in the past was to throw more money into some half bubblegum measure, hire some more bureaucrats and get a predictable outcome. I wouldn't want money for the program. Let inmates teach inmates. One kid has no education, let a white collar criminal help him get a GED. The white collar criminal earns early release time for the successes he or she has in helping their students get the GED.

Governors of states could help by giving businesses that offer a second chance to those coming out of prison with tax incentives in order to make it work. Give a guy a second chance, get tax credits.

Exactly! The real goal in .gov programs is increased bureaucracy, not effective prevention.

 

[The Resister]

Exactly! The real goal in .gov programs is increased bureaucracy, not effective prevention.

Citizen based initiatives are preferred over bureaucrats writing more rules for more bureaucrats.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

On my birthday in 1989 (January 17) a guy named Patrick Purdy took an AK style rifle and went to an elementary school where he killed five children and wounded thirty nine more. I began studying Patrick Purdy and have looked at every mass shooting in the United States since that happened. I can account for all but 3 shootings during those 22 years. At the end of the day, there is a list of things that EVERY mass shooter has in common. I've identified 16 commonalities that identify mass shooters. As a matter of fact, once a person meets any 8 of the markers, there is a 100 percent chance they WILL commit an act of violence. Here are those 16 markers if these markers are done in conjunction with SSRIs:

1) White males ages 17 to 40

2) Previously diagnosed with ADD / ADHD

3) Parents are divorced / separated (Latch key child)

4) Has a fascination with violence (violent video games, drawing violence laden pictures, fascinated by the macabre) There is chaos, violence, dysfunction in the home to the point it has been reported to police (especially mental, sexual, or violence related complaints)

5) Has seen a psychologist and / or psychiatrist for depression or anxiety 6) One or both parents are alcoholics / drug addicts

7) There is a history of violence in the home

8) The police are called routinely to report the child (generally for acts of violence including, but not limited to hurting or killing small animals, bullying, fights with siblings, posting violent content on social media, acts of vandalism, altercations with neighbors)

9) Expulsions and / or suspensions from school due to violent activity

10) Reported to the police for threats, stalking, inappropriate violent / sexual remarks, invasions of privacy

11) Illegal drug usage / participation in gangs

12) Completely introverted and a social outcast that has been rejected for dates

13) History of rejection

14) The custodial parent has had run ins with local law enforcement more than twice

15) A child has reported to school officials, a teacher or law enforcement that the individual has done something threatening, demeaning, or suggestive

16) The child has a fascination with satanic subject matter; dresses the part

You can generally determine a child's future by the age of 14. Past performance dictates future behavior. So, the $64,000 question is, what do you do once you've identified the people who are going to become violent?

What about people who fit these markers in teen years and did no violence? My circle of friends in high school would have fit a lot of these. I grew up in a violent chaotic home and I dealt with some issues in this list, but mostly ones that are passive, rather than active. I was diagnosed with ADD like almost every male in the 90s. Never took meds for it, though caffeine does tend to have a paradoxical effect. I had run ins with the cops back then, oddly mostly dealing with a cop who was a brutal piece of work and was a sadist.

I dealt with a lot of these markers in a peaceful way. I am a Psych nurse now. No history of violence and I am pushing 40.

After columbine, the news gave the warnings of school shooters, and at the time the articles and conventional wisdom described me as the threat. I dressed in all black and listened to extreme metal and punk and owned guns. I was actually quite fond of mine. Still own all mine from those days too. I guess I see stuff like this and I wonder about the kids who got dealt a crappy hand in life like me for example, and did not harm others.

We exist

 

[Hueco]

With all this talk of research in the OP, I was hoping to see some data with the assertions...

 

[The Resister]

What about people who fit these markers in teen years and did no violence? My circle of friends in high school would have fit a lot of these. I grew up in a violent chaotic home and I dealt with some issues in this list, but mostly ones that are passive, rather than active. I was diagnosed with ADD like almost every male in the 90s. Never took meds for it, though caffeine does tend to have a paradoxical effect. I had run ins with the cops back then, oddly mostly dealing with a cop who was a brutal piece of work and was a sadist.

I dealt with a lot of these markers in a peaceful way. I am a Psych nurse now. No history of violence and I am pushing 40.

After columbine, the news gave the warnings of school shooters, and at the time the articles and conventional wisdom described me as the threat. I dressed in all black and listened to extreme metal and punk and owned guns. I was actually quite fond of mine. Still own all mine from those days too. I guess I see stuff like this and I wonder about the kids who got dealt a crappy hand in life like me for example, and did not harm others.

We exist

You say you met some of the markers. Did you threaten people with violence? Kill small animals? Were you expelled / suspended from school? Did you do drugs? A nonviolent marker means nothing without a violent marker. That is why it takes half of the markers to know, for sure, if a person needs help. People do not generate police reports for dressing in black or owning firearms. I was fortunate enough to have an experience unlike yours, so humor me for a couple of minutes.

When I was in the 8th grade, I had an altercation with the principal's son. He was poking me with a bat and on the third poke, I grabbed the bat and stuck my knee... well let's say you were looking at a map of the U.S. and this guy's head was in California and his feet in Indiana, I put my knee in the outskirts of Omaha. That netted me a 21 day suspension and that meant I was automatically flunked. Not only that, the principal was a turd, so the next year, he put in a special education class. It was where they put the mentally deficient, slow, and retarded kids. After a few weeks, the teacher asked me why I was put in her class. I told her of how the principal was screwing me over (that incident was not the first time) and so the teacher ultimately didn't like the answers she was getting from the principal and the school staff. She went to the Superintendent of Schools. In turn, he got a psychologist to spend three days with me where I underwent an IQ test, aptitude test, numerous one on one interviews in between tests. The psychologist made a recommendation. I was pulled out of special ed and put in the 10th grade. Who knew? I was able to perform above the grade level I was in before they put me in special ed.

So, because I was known as a "problem child," but the problem (sic) was not mine, it took someone objective to intervene. My problem was that I was being bullied. If you read my posts carefully, at every stage, I'm looking to see if the "problem" is actually the child OR some other factor. Had someone not taken an interest in me; had I not had a civil intervention, where would I have ended up? Before that teacher, nobody listened. I would go to school and get bullied repeatedly. AND, the principal wanted me out of school. I ended up in a class for low IQ students because nobody listened. So, the steps I have outlined means that when a child is exhibiting the traits that define a violent person, we jump into action and make sure the parents know. Then, if the parents do not and / or cannot resolve the issue, you take it up a notch each time until you find out where the real problem is and address that. My plan does not focus just on the child, but others around him or her. The objective is to identify the real problem. Then deal with what the real problem is. THAT ultimately reduces a propensity to commit violent acts in later years.

 

[The Resister]

With all this talk of research in the OP, I was hoping to see some data with the assertions...

The greatest piece of data is that I spent 31 years studying mass shooters. Of ALL the mass shootings in that period, the catalyst was SSRIs OR the actions of a political jihadist. In one case, nobody can rule out that the guy was not on SSRIs either. That would be Stephen Paddock. And, if you believe the radical Muslims, they claim that Paddock was successfully converted to Islam.

It appears to me that if I found one commonality (SSRIs) in conjunction with a set of identifiable markers and can state unequivocally that we pretty much KNOW who is going to commit an act of violence, you should check into that. It doesn't take mountains of evidence. Pick your favorite mass shooter - or pick one at random. Read about him. I identified him above. He is was on SSRIs OR he was a political jihadist. So, why doesn't the system use their own researchers to confirm it? It's because they make their money from the drug trade. No more wholesale drug addicts being produced = less bureaucrats, cops, and government workers. The problem is, many people on SSRIs have legitimate issues. So, we have to separate who has addressable mental issues from those who have extraneous issues (i.e. the "problem" might be the parents or a school official for example) and deal with it early on.

 

[oldcorpgunny]

No matter the circumstances of an individuals upbringing, there comes a time when that person must make decisions. It is always the responsibility of the person making those decisions as to whether or not their decisions are good or bad. It is an error in judgement to attribute aberrant behavior to a childhood causation. Many of the things that you mention have merit in an ideal world, but the reality is that we aren't.