As some of you know I really enjoy the conspiracy theory aspect of the net. I love the passion and conviction and I also love the belly laughs I can sometimes get out of it. Of course there are some things I find incredibly abhorrent too and I dare say I'll get around to those in subsequent articles. My current issue de jour is with many people's obsession with linking psychotropic drugs with mass killers as if the drugs were responsible. I believe this to be a tremendously ignorant and irresponsible attitude to be publicising and I'll tell you why.
First of all, who would have thought...who would believe...that someone who goes on to murder a lot of people might have a pre-existing mental health issue for which they are already receiving treatment? Of course a lot of these people are on drugs, they're mentally damaged individuals and considering we almost definitely have over-medication issues in our societies it comes as no great surprise these people were medicated themselves. Psychotropic drugs do not create personalities and for the vast majority of users they simply give them either a crutch to help them build a foundation for a more solid future in terms of their mental health or a medical means of simply getting through the day without something dreadful happening.
Sometimes there is nothing medical science can do to prevent someone entering a destructive downward spiral. And despite the best efforts of doctors these people can go on to behaviour which is socially abhorrent whether in the form of self harm or harming others. Often these cases are linked to the person concerned not quite displaying behaviours which could warrant being sectioned. Or perhaps they are able to do these things as a result of the medical establishment failing them and releasing them early as we hear so often. Neither of these situations even hint at the drugs being their bridge to carrying out horrible acts.
What we seem to have here is a very simple, and completely unfounded, theory. If we say the person is A, the drug is B, and the act is C the theory goes if A takes B then C is the consequence or at the very least a major contributing factor. There is nothing to support this theory, absolutely nothing at all beyond the ever-growing hunger of people looking to find some darker reason for every situation instead of the already dark one staring them right in the face.
I'm all for being proven wrong but I'd need more than anecdotal evidence from some random Internet person whose expertise on this issue is based on spending some time on AboveTopSecret or Infowars. But before you decide to school me on this I'd also like a question answered. Given the amount of people on psychotropic medication why are there more spree killers? I mean LOTS more spree killers.
Sometimes the elephant in the room isn't really there.