Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan - 1776 Will Commence Again' If Guns Taken Away

[Roo]

Sgreger! Man, what a pleasant surprise.

Lx, amazing. I really like that.

[sgreger1]

Sgreger! Man, what a pleasant surprise.

Lx, amazing. I really like that.

Howdy Roo, hope all is well in your neck of the woods!

[CoderGuy]

Howdy Roo, hope all is well in your neck of the woods!

Great to see you back sg! I knew if we headed down the gun control rabbit hole far enough, you would be there.

[sgreger1]

Great to see you back sg! I knew if we headed down the gun control rabbit hole far enough, you would be there.

You know I can't resist a good gun control thread. Hope I don't piss off all of Britain this time! (PS: I plan to piss of all of Britain)

[phantom]

[remanifest]

The points Alex Jones made to Piers Morgan were exactly right, in that SSRIs are causing the problems, and that the media is focusing on issues that are miniscule by comparison. Unfortunately, by losing his cool shortly into the interview, he detracted from his message. He should have kept his cool, and deflected the questions by saying, "Piers, your nit-picking questions about miniscule facts miss the point, in that they don't focus on the root cause of the gun violence in the first place. You're focusing on minutia, which is an intellectually weak position to take."

The right to bear arms is precisely to defend ourselves from tyranny, and that's that. Attempting to disarm the American populace is an act of tyranny, and if 1% of the population realizes that and takes a stand, there will indeed be a huge revolution.

I personally don't like guns, but I believe everyone should know how to operate a weapon in situations where they are called for. Any government's attempt to disarm the populace, or to ban "assualt weapons" as they're being defined by Diane Feinstein's legislation constitutes a direct threat to our liberties. A disarmed populace is at the mercy of those who seek to control them, which, historically, are psychopaths. "Good" people very rarely desire to be in government in the first place.

[CoderGuy]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2691[/ATTACH]

Best analogy I have seen!

[Crow]

The points Alex Jones made to Piers Morgan were exactly right, in that SSRIs are causing the problems, and that the media is focusing on issues that are miniscule by comparison. Unfortunately, by losing his cool shortly into the interview, he detracted from his message. He should have kept his cool, and deflected the questions by saying, "Piers, your nit-picking questions about miniscule facts miss the point, in that they don't focus on the root cause of the gun violence in the first place. You're focusing on minutia, which is an intellectually weak position to take."

The right to bear arms is precisely to defend ourselves from tyranny, and that's that. Attempting to disarm the American populace is an act of tyranny, and if 1% of the population realizes that and takes a stand, there will indeed be a huge revolution.

I personally don't like guns, but I believe everyone should know how to operate a weapon in situations where they are called for. Any government's attempt to disarm the populace, or to ban "assualt weapons" as they're being defined by Diane Feinstein's legislation constitutes a direct threat to our liberties. A disarmed populace is at the mercy of those who seek to control them, which, historically, are psychopaths. "Good" people very rarely desire to be in government in the first place.

That's a very interesting point of view.

Thanks for sharing that with us!

-----------

I should probably add that I'm not in complete agreement, but the argument was strong and I agree with a lot of what you mentioned.

While I recognise that SSRIs have the potential to incite violent tendencies in certain individuals; I don't think it's fair to blame the drug itself. Loosely prescribing said drugs and not adequately monitoring the patient could be considered a major factor in gun violence, but it's not the root cause of gun violence.

------------

Perhaps the root cause is society itself?

[Snusdog]

Sgreger!!!!!...........how is it going bro..........good to see ya back in the house


Guys if you have not read Huxley's Brave New World or Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death you should...........both are very insightful

[sgreger1]

Sgreger!!!!!...........how is it going bro..........good to see ya back in the house


Guys if you have not read Huxley's Brave New World or Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death you should...........both are very insightful

Sup Doooog!

Yah Huxley's book is a classic but I have never read "Amusing ourselves to death" sounds like an interesting read.

[sgreger1]

That's a very interesting point of view.

Thanks for sharing that with us!

-----------

I should probably add that I'm not in complete agreement, but the argument was strong and I agree with a lot of what you mentioned.

While I recognise that SSRIs have the potential to incite violent tendencies in certain individuals; I don't think it's fair to blame the drug itself. Loosely prescribing said drugs and not adequately monitoring the patient could be considered a major factor in gun violence, but it's not the root cause of gun violence.

------------

Perhaps the root cause is society itself?

I have to agree, I don't really buy into Alex's position on flu shots or SSRI's personally. I am on SSRI's in fact for anxiety and it was the one thing that gave me my life back, so for that I am thankful As far as giving them to young children and stuff that is a whole other ballgame, but I think we can all agree that the root cause of these mass shooters is based in mental health and our inability to be able to adequately deal with it. I don't think that's anyone's fault, this guy had very little that would peg him as a potential threat, and I am not one for labeling people potential threats anyways without strong evidence. I don't know how to fix it, I don't think anyone does, which is why they go for the weak argument that banning guns would somehow make it better.

[Snusdog]

The second amendment isn't a "right to hunt" or a "right to be 2 generations behind the current regime's weapons". It's a right to bear arms, primarily to keep the government in check. When it was ratified, it was for state of the art weaponry which was the equal of what the government used. They didn't limit it to slingshots, swords, or bow/arrow, or anything else. Any argument regarding the quality of weapon misses the point in the best case, and deliberately obfuscates the issue in the worst.

That is a great post.............the right to bear slingshots.....and throw rocks at tanks

Well put brother

[Crow]

While I recognise that SSRIs have the potential to incite violent tendencies in certain individuals; I don't think it's fair to blame the drug itself. Loosely prescribing said drugs and not adequately monitoring the patient could be considered a major factor in gun violence, but it's not the root cause of gun violence.

I am on SSRI's in fact for anxiety and it was the one thing that gave me my life back, so for that I am thankful

Case in point.

SSRIs have worked extremely well for me (not one panic attack since), but I'm starting to 'feel' like I don't need to take it anymore; so I may start tapering myself off the SSRI for good. My sister used to take them too, but she tapered herself off when she 'felt' she no longer needed it... No problems, no complications.

------------

And for those that are unfamiliar with SSRIs... They're selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

[remanifest]

While this list is not exhaustive nor fully up to date, it shows a link between violent behavior and SSRIs

http://ssristories.com/index.php?sort=date&p=

Adam Lanza Taking Antipsychotics

Wade Michael Page was linked to PSYOP units, with the FBI clamming up on anything to do with his history, including psychological issues. The FBI has been known to create & infiltrate White Power movements (ala the National Alliance)

Disturbing Link Between Age, Psychiatric Meds and Mass Shootings

My point here is that while SSRIs may be perceived as beneficial, the side effects are serious, and can come on without warning. They are inherently dangerous, and their link to violent episodes is undeniable. That's why the black box warnings and inserts are explicit about this. Side effects like murder and/or suicide aren't worth the perceived benefits, in my opinion. Because MDs sign off on the drugs, many people have a perception that they're safe, until they are chemically induced to do something horrific.

What I'm trying to say is that guns are not the cause of these societal problems. There are better ways to treat mental health problems, and in my opinion the pushing of these types of drugs is negligent at best. This is something that the media should be addressing, and they're not, by and large. Look at the contributions the major media outlets receive from pharmaceutical companies, and you'll see why. Count the number of commercials you see for these types of drugs, specifically during prime time and late at night.

[Crow]

After watching the segment, I decided to check out Alex Jones' website to see if he would discuss his visit to Piers.

Well, here it is...

If you can manage to filter out all the paranoia and extremism, you will find that his statistics (regarding violent acts per capita) are accurate; and it does beg the question, "Why was Piers so determined to block Jones' statistics whilst pushing hard with statistics of his own?"

It's not some grand conspiracy like what Alex Jones' is conjuring up............. No, it's politics, pure and simple.

Of course, I don't agree with most of the things that Alex Jones preaches.. But you have to admit, he is entertaining to watch. (You won't hear many liberal Democrats saying that! )