I always ask where are the families? Well, it appears that Mr. Rodriguez was tossed out of his mother-in-law's house and later divorced by his wife. They washed their hands of someone who obviously needed help. It is unfortunate that the excuse is too often, "well, he wouldn't take his meds, so was impossible to live with."

I have many varied opinions about the specifics of gun laws, but this is certainly a terrible tragedy. I have PTSD, but because I know what could happen to me if I were 'on the books', I live 'under the radar' and can buy anything I want. I would never own a gun. I would never allow one in my home because I understand my condition and would hate to shoot a family member or neighbor thinking I had an intruder. I know what happens to me sometimes. I just hunker down and ride it out, but I would never want to do that in the same house with a gun or any deadly weapon. I have an alarm system, and I can also call 911 if I really think I have an intruder. I understand that not everyone can make safe decisions, but the whole debate still pains me in some ways. It just does.

We cannot have it both ways, on one hand rejecting psychiatric labeling and forced TX with loss of civil liberties and than when it suits us label someone with a "schizophrenia" dx and deprive them of their rights as laid out by the US constitution and confirmed by the Supreme Court. What litmus test shall we use to decide this? Just a dx? Will that apply to all those with a dx? Are you that confident in psychiatric dx? Etoh abuse is at least as great a risk factor for such violent crime as a schizophrenia dx. Shall we begin depriving heavy drinkers of gun ownership? We can all see after the fact that emotionally unstable people should not own guns. Year after year when such tragedies occur it is clear that in a country where individuals have open access to firearms there is no way of preventing it. Psychiatry surely is unable to complete this task.

People seem to live in a lot of denial. I had friends whose son was seriously depressed. Do you think I could get the dad to understand the need to remove his guns from the house? No way. He just couldn't get the connection no matter how many times I explained Depression + Guns + Impulsive Teen = Increased Possibility of Suicide.

Happily, the kid managed to get past his troubles without blowing his head off. I'm sure getting out of the house helped.

When are we going to stop using dubious labels to deny equality to segments of society deemed "Less Than"

I know this may sound incredibly irrational on my part for many to understand or agree with.

But how about consequences directed related to a considered unreasonable action. (Or in plain speak) Whether you have a crazy label or not; if you commit heinous crimes and murder; then you receive an appropriate resulting consequence and punishment.

Here we have a case where life forces pushed a person to desperate and tragic measures.

We don't know if this person was rightfully terminated from his job and denied unemployment benefits for good cause; which in-turn cascaded to other negative events including the loss of his home, support systems, and relationships.

Of course its always the label that grabs the headlines; "all crazy people are dangerous don't you know". Thank you so much Fuller Torrey leaning people for this enlightened approach to our board based social ills.

Using isolated incidents of violence and labels as ammunition/arguments to deny rights to large segments of the population is just more of the truly insane psychiatric institutionalized power grabs extending into people's lives, The Bill of Rights, and our Constitution.

Surely this horrible event could have been averted if we had just force medicated this disease and institutionalized everyone "we psychiatry" deemed dangerous (whether in reality they are truly dangerous or not) using the same old "We know better than you" scare tactics to subvert and demonize targeted groups from their own self determination.

How many times throughout history has this been used against other falsely accused and labeled dangerous menaces to society. To many times for myself personally to be ever comfortable with the suppression approach in solving obvious societal problems.

I would love to continue this ranting expose'; but I need to go clean my guns in preparation of the day "BIG BROTHER" comes knocking at my door.

It's fairly easy to get a gun, even if you're barred from it. Gun shows.

OK, all those guns are all spanking clean, locked, and loaded; my delusion of safety is sitting quite nicely as if a brilliant hallucination of Pink Flamingo's and Lolly Pops.

I can finally breath a welcome sigh of relief this morning.

I now have the time to give this a little more thought preponderance.

In light of those recent events @ MGH where the patient attacked the psychiatrist with a knife, and that story of a psychiatrist that lost it at an army base. I may have to reconsider my position on this complete topic.

Because we as a society must maintain the illusion and delusion of safety (please people, take your pills whatever they are).

All people predisposed to genetically passed on mental thought processes, or have been determined to suffer from the effects of a life long incurable biological diseases of the brain will be banned from owning or using the following items effective as soon as we scare enough people into believing you and those crazy people are too dangerous to trust with the aforementioned items.

Knifes - obviously these are dangerous weapons capable of inflicting great bodily injury up to and including death. (those crazy people can cut their meat with their teeth damn it)

Matches, Lighters, or access to combustible or flammable liquids of any kind - I would think the danger here is quite obvious without going into all the burnt flesh details. (even "Smokey the Bear" knows crazy people should not play with matches; plus hard liquor does not mix well with your happy pills people).

Cars, trucks and other forms of deemed transportation vehicles or devices capable of being used as ramming or projectiles for the intended purpose of causing harm or injury. (Crazy people need to walk more anywise, it's therapeutic and keeps the weight gain down from those miracle drugs we have forced them all to take; plus public transportation is a good place to meet and exchange ideas with other considered crazy people, almost like a real version of an online dating service)

Hands, arms, legs, or heads - We all should know the grievous harm a well placed punch, kick, choke hold, or head butt can inflict - (though surgical removal of the aforementioned items would be preferred; restraints, fluffy and soft neon painted helmets, three sizes too small pants, and other deemed necessary items can be utilized in place of decapitation)

Thought and mind control - we can't be to careful with these crazy creeps ability to infest the thoughts and actions of the elite normals; so since we have the means, ability, and technology available; we will place "computer chips" in the brains/skulls of all those deemed crazy or may have a propensity to lean toward or to develop craziness sometime during their living existence using this advanced technology to track their every move and thought.

WOW! I don't know about you out there reading this ranting babble; but I'm feeling a whole lot safer already.

Now I just need to get that buddy pal Fuller T. on the line with my change of heart; while plotting how we are going to accomplish are goals of total and complete control of the human race.

I'm almost sure big pharma will will kick in and throw a few dollars are way in this courageous effort for the betterment of all humanity; not to mention the profitability of such an endeavor in future and current sales.

I hope you all wish me luck pro-suing this new mission and manifest destiny track.

I would like at this time to thank you each of you here in advance anywho.

The real question is whether guns and Prozac type drugs can exist together. I think one or the other has to go.

In the olden days, before the introduction of Prozac in Dec. 1987, one percent of the population was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and one percent was diagnosed with schizophrenia. Now, with so many people going manic/psychotic on the SSRIs, over six percent of the population is diagnosed as bipolar. I don't know the stats for schizophrenia but it has probably increased also. I think the important issue about this case is to find out whether Rodriquez started on an antidepressant first and then was diagnosed with schizophrenia. Some are, you know. Not everyone is diagnosed as bipolar. Then, for him to go on and off these antipsychotics/moodstabilizers is really playing with fire. It helps kindle the "supersensitivity psychosis" so often seen with med hopping or with sudden withdrawals.

So we must decide - should we have guns in the U.S. or Prozac-type drugs.

I get the impression it's darn easy to lay your hands on a gun, laws or no. As Kimbriel says there are gun shows where the laws don't seem to apply for some reason. Guns are everywhere, especially in the south. And I agree with Rosie that easy access to guns and psych drugs are not a good mix.

Well, the only problem I have with this is, as far as I can tell, 99% of crimes are committed by people without Schizophrenia. So, maybe we should also look at people without the Schizophrenia label who go off the deep end, and decide whether THEY were mentally stable enough to get their hands on a gun.

And why is it that the psychiatrist who killed all those people gets "life problems" "trauma problems" but the person with the SZ label just gets "mentally ill"?

Sara- correct. The laws are relaxed at gun shows.

This piece is an appalling demonstration of the powerful stigma of the schizophrenia label. We see "his ex mother-in-law says he's schizophrenic" written in the New York Times and assume he is a gun wielding lunatic and of course that the Dr. Jekyll/ Mr. Hyde story is scientific fact.

What if everyone were given a psych label by their ex mother-in-law(s)? Under what other circumstances would the New York Times print opinions of a disgruntled relative as an established fact?

We're living in desperate economic times and are surprised when desperate acts occur. This story shouldn't be about calling for gun control or forced drugging but instead about basic human needs and how humans respond when these needs are not met.

Oh and there's the fact that pleading insanity is the only way this guy can avoid the death penalty. I don't think anyone is schizophrenic and don't think anyone deserves less civil rights or less responsibility for their criminal actions because he or she hides behind a mentally ill label to avoid responsibility for his or her actions.