Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If someone is mentally ill, they are sick, not guilty of a crime. They didn't choose to get sick. Should people be punished for something that is beyond their control? Yes, there needs to be a way to force people to receive treatment, but you can't just lock someone up for being "different." If they aren't a threat to themselves or others, then why should they be locked away? They are also human beings.
If I am reading this correctly,the person isn't responsible for their actions so shouldn't be held accountable?
But you favor stricter gun control laws don't you?
I agree, but what is the criteria we use to commit someone? According to some on this board, using firearms terms constitutes a threat of violence. Therefore Roaddog's use of the term "trigger" means he's nuts. Obviously not a good criteria!
Is there anyone here in the mental health profession? If so, are there characteristics to look for to determine if a person is a threat to others?
The main characteristic is, walks on two legs with little bodily hair.
There is no control of those who are mentally ill, or derranged, if they do not seek medical attnetion/professional help. These people need to be on medication. But as someone i once knew who was very mental, he did go nuts, he thought everyone around him was insane and sick. When he was on his medicine, he was sort of himself, when he was not, once again that sick ill mental person. These people who are mentally sick, or have mental illnesses of some sort, wihtout medicne are a ticking time bomb. The person i knew, should of stayed on his medicine, he ended up killing his own Mother, a person i loved so dearly, and did terrible things after her killing. When he realized what he did in a sane mind and on medicine, he then killed himself, years later. So sad. There are more mentally ill people out there then you can imagine, and not seeking or getting help of any kind. Does not take much to set these people off, believe me i now know.
Not everyone with a mental illness is a "ticking time bomb". Statements like that don't help the stigma.
If I am reading this correctly,the person isn't responsible for their actions so shouldn't be held accountable?
But you favor stricter gun control laws don't you?
I didn't mention anything about Loughner -- of course he's responsible (if he's not legally insane). I was talking about mentally ill people who have NOT committed crimes.
I didn't mention anything about Loughner -- of course he's responsible (if he's not legally insane). I was talking about mentally ill people who have NOT committed crimes.
Okay.
In other words the mentally ill should not be prejudged for what 'might' happen?
In other words the mentally ill should not be prejudged for what 'might' happen?
No, they shouldn't be. Anyone might commit a crime. I'm sure that 10 years ago, many (mentally healthy) murderers sitting in jail would never have thought they would kill someone. I'm sure the drunk drivers who killed people had no idea they would take someone's life when they started drinking the night of the accident.
The fact is, unless there is evidence that someone is dangerous, they shouldn't be locked up. If we start locking people away for what they "might" do, it could easily turn into a "witch hunt" where people are imprisoned or committed for no reason whatsoever, only another person's irrational fear or prejudice.
The mentally ill already have to suffer society's stigma and rejection. Why should they be "prejudged?" They have an illness. They're not evil. It's not their fault they're mentally ill. Should we "prejudge" those with cancer or pneumonia?
You then think it is wrong for those with a mental illness to be denied the right to own a firearm.
No, I didn't say that. Stop trying to twist my words. I said people shouldn't be locked up and deprived of their freedom for no reason, not that precautions against illness-caused violence shouldn't be taken.
No, I didn't say that. Stop trying to twist my words. I said people shouldn't be locked up and deprived of their freedom for no reason, not that precautions against illness-caused violence shouldn't be taken.
So those who have an illness should be treated differently and should have their rights restricted?
Are those with mental illnesses a danger or not????
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
