![Gen X Didnt Have This Problem [509x540 - 45KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/VaOdp0.jpg){kind=link}
Name one instance of a shooting in which meds were obtained this way. These parents willingly gave their kids these meds.
That's not how rational debate works. The way it works is the party making the claim supports the claim. You claim that mass shooters are on drugs, therefore their parents willingly supplied them. I pointed out that your argument is a non-sequitur. That means you have to support your argument with additional data. Show us the data confirming that mass shooters are taking drugs with their parents knowledge and consent.
No, you provided an anecdotal response with no supporting evidence at all, and continue to fail to explain your claim that these children are all getting their meds without the knowledge of their parents.
It is not a non sequitur to assume parents tend to provide their kids medication. In fact, it is stupid to suggest otherwise without any attempt at corroboration at all.
You don't get to come in here blasting out completely unfounded claims then demand that the response includes context and evidence you yourself failed to provide.
So support your initial claim, or tuck the tail and fuck off.
No, you provided an anecdotal response with no supporting evidence at all, and continue to fail to explain your claim that these children are all getting their meds without the knowledge of their parents.
I made no such claim. I claimed that they are able to get meds without their parents. For those uneducated in the ways of logic, that means your hypothesis cannot stand without further evidence to support it.
It is not a non sequitur to assume parents tend to provide their kids medication.
That's not what you said. You said they all do. That means even one case makes your argument incorrect.
You don't get to come in here blasting out completely unfounded claims then demand that the response includes context and evidence you yourself failed to provide.
I didn't make any claims that are disputed, unless you're disputing that psychologists are available in public schools. Be careful, though. All it takes is one example and your argument against that will be toast as well.
So support your initial claim, or tuck the tail and fuck off.
All right. You asked for it.
https://www.bpusd.net/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=881574&type=d&pREC_ID=1406302 https://achieve.lausd.net/Page/17249 https://scs.bcps.org/departments/social_emotional_support/office_of_school_climate/psychological_services https://www.browardschools.com/Page/32565 https://www.gcpsk12.org/Page/23586 https://www.waynecountyschools.org/SchoolPsychologyServices.aspx https://www.sandiegounified.org/departments/school_psychology_services https://www.wsfcs.k12.nc.us/domain/47 https://www.fwisd.org/domain/2026 https://www.clevelandmetroschools.org/Page/15160
(post is archived)