When it comes to prevention what comes to mind? In simple terms how to prevent a problem how to avoid a problem how to determine if there is a problem how to stop a problem without saying whether a problem is a cause for something that can otherwise be prevented. What problems have we identified as causes for the events we seek to prevent. In what ways do problems let us know what’s wrong or once identified later be known as factors to better identify issues by knowing the characteristics and traits in common among those who’s actions we seek to prevent, what can make those problems not occur so that those problems don’t lead up to or become the signs of what to anticipate or how to identify whether something worse is going to occur or is being planned to occur. When we think of problems and prevention we wonder how could we not know, in what ways do problems justify action or inaction and why, in what ways should we not condition those in observance of problems to be responsible for hesitating not aggressively manage a problem without knowing of things becoming worse. How can people be trained to know when they’ve identified a problem, if they are reacting with inaction or uncertainty what is the probability of things becoming worse without knowing based on what things seem like or look like. How can one know if a problem can get worse and in what ways can the problem of an individual extend beyond their life and impact the lives of others, should this then be the basis for identifying a problem and seeking solution for a problem identified in a person of interest identified. Should we not expect the worst and why, in what ways does requiring observers to be on guard waste energy and how can we avoid people from being affected by addressing of problems or issues (including people known or unknown offenders), in a way to cause the least damage and disturbance to all including anyone confronted to be holding a problem that is doing a disservice to others around them and limit a persons presence on the basis of their mental health affecting or not affecting those around them, and how can we identify that a persons mental health issues are affecting others around them. This was specifically an issue in a school violence case in which a student was reported to have been drawing in class, among other causes questioned such as video games. Where is one taught to be violent and to respond in that way, is it a learned trait, is it a known mental health issue, in what way are politics to blame, and what is pushing people of any age to their limits in life, in what way does any problem become too much that anyone acts out of the scope of norlmacy, it would be wrong to interpret school violence as a drastic measure taken in response to acquiring a mental health issue identified by others, as a consequence asked to leave or stay home, be bullied, not focus, disrupt a room. If identification of problems is not inhibiting those who do attack from carrying out violence, in what ways should problem solvers not be injured or hurt or made to feel unmotivated to tackle a problem existing in known offenders who committed acts of violence we now question whether could be prevented. In what way do we blame politics and then run the risk of reaching politics or assume a system of politics was broken or so broken to justify a violent act. A violent act should not be given the credit of how an executive political or business decision is made, most violent offenders of concern have lived less, have less, have few responsibilities, are not employed, to be compared to any split decision anyone else would make convinced to act be wise ultimately something is not working for them that action or inaction is wrongfully credited as an option left over for anyone in life violent, or in defense of self. No one carries the weight of what is known or wrong with anyone or any environment by any education status information or misinformation to conclude that what is wrong with themselves, as confronted, or wrong with others, a historical line of communication or solicitation for any confrontations in life to occur. Sick in common is the more probable consequence of people thinking off eachother or thinking like one another or be influenced or changed by one another to believe anything is wrong or requires them to be sick or to commit wrongs or an act of violence. This on behalf of application for how violence occurs reinforces people to be sick by one another while leaves open the potential for passing blames between people as though their politics or communications or sense of what’s happening real or unreal is to blame or has or will contribute to a mental illness suffered by someone who commits a crime or an act of violence. This makes people feel sick whenever a person is blamed for the sickness experiences by someone who commits an act of violence, and what later becomes the reality of things occurring whether politically correct or not will reflect how that persons mental illness was acquired and how it could have been transferred and in what ways does a person compared to a person justify analysis of issues known or not known to say that one’s expression reflects what was mentally ill about an offender who committed acts of violence, known. This is relevant to my recent Shorty Award, in which not mentioned were people I used to communicate with professionally and have since been sick, because the word “audience” was used, the victims to the first case of an act of violence related to the field of Film, and to my IMDb membership. In what ways does having an audience reflect a persons act of violence argued a reaction to what triggered a person to respond in that way, and in what ways is a person observed to bear or not to hear characteristics to blame as a source for mental illness to explain for the mental illness of others, the characteristics and traits exhibited by them, or personalities, in what ways does that prevent acts of violence by attacking people as sources to be blamed for the mental illness claimed to have been suffered by a violent criminal. How as a society are things made to feel better when people are allowed to think you’re mental illness was transferred to another person to be mentally ill and react in that way, what options are being being left with that any justifications are made for any ultimate decisions made executive.

So I’m sorry that although we cannot solve how my sickness it’s transferred or causes ultimate decisions thought politics cannot manage and micro manage, in what ways does my health failing or acquiring mental health issues or observance of me justify whether a trait a behavior an idea a reaction a look came from me and I’m sorry if you thought that my mental health issues influence anyone else to feel sick who sees me knows me thinks of me has viewed my writing or apart of life and able to follow politics be limited to feeling good by what life is like now or made to believe that their life should affect the lives of others or that action or crime or violence is any reaction taught exposed to or argued to be a known consequence or ultimate decision made by anyone viewed as limited or experienced less life based on what is known who is known taught to respond in that way, and in what way are people with mental illness being made to blame for mental difficulties if others.

Photo Reference: https://www.ft.com/content/490a8466-7a42-11ea-bd25-7fd923850377