You are absolutely correct; there is no way that number is accurate. I should have caught it; thanks.

A Supervisor of mine many years was discussing the intimate connection between aggression and libido in sex and made the unforgettable comment: If you can't kill, you can never f*ck. It was somewhat hyperbolic but his point was valid. An adult man doesn't deny his aggressive impulses, he learns to control himself and use aggression when it is necessary and appropriate.

Its a wonder we have been able to perpetuate the species! With any luck the angry feminists and the angry misogynists will cancel each other out and there will be room for those of us who appreciate that men and women can be delightfully different and spend our time trying to bridge the gap between our alien species.

The relationship of drug use to major psychiatric disorders is complicated and unresolvable. Do drugs make psychotic episodes more likely? Yes. Do some drugs precipitate psychotic epsiodes, sometimes, in some people? Yes. Can we predict who is vulnerable before hand? Sometimes, yes, often, no. As well, this person's sexual failures did not cause his decompensation but were secondary to his psychological difficulties. Schizophrenics show signs of mis-attunement to people in social settings well before their illness bursts forth in their first psychotic break. It is often hard for family to notice because there is an often slow slide into disturbance. Schizophrenics become ill slowly at first, and then all of a sudden.

If this young man had indeed made documented death threats he should have been evaluated well before the shootings. If he had then been found to be psychotic, he could have been hospitalized and could have been treated against his will only as long as he was actively dangerous (and he could have gone to court within his first 2 weeks and if not actively homicidal the Judge could have either refused to allow him to be medicated or forced his release from the hospital.) There are no provisions for ongoing, involuntary, long term treatment of someone who is not actively expressing homicidal ideation or has committed a crime and is under the supervision of the courts. Trying to arrange such a structure is complicated and the potential for abuse is very high.

I read Jay's post and was very disappointed. I considered responding but did not think it worth while; anyone who is willing to give credence to such nonsense is no longer amenable to debate. It is the equivalent to responding to the question: Do you still beat your wife? There is no possible response; once you offer any answer you have entered their arena, established with their rules.

Judge, if AGW is scientific, then the theory must be falsifiable; to that end, what evidence would you accept that would falsify the theory of global warming? What are the "facts" that you can identify as forming the crucial underpinnings of AGW? If you cannot answer those questions you are not talking about science but about faith.

Excellent; thank you!

Thank you for the information. I will have to do some more research before I send them any more money.

Excellent article, well worth your time; I plan on blogging about this later in the week as time permits.