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.
Not this conservative....I’ve been arguing for a return to the system of state run asylums for years. When I was a kid these shootings were much less common. The left blames guns for today’s violence, well guns have been part of our national culture since the beginning and people did not do this. Throughout the 20th century these things were rare....until the mid 90s. Since then they have become common. The last 5 years they have been prolific. I believe our society is broken and that is part of the problem. This wingnut was motivated by political and racial hatred and in the coming days we will see the unrest and demonstrations he hoped to start. However most shooters are just plain nuts, people who should have been removed from public. Dealing with the mentality ill would be a good start to fixing this problem, and much of our homeless and drug problems as well. A lot of our societies criminal and vagrant population is really our untreated mentally ill population.
Conservatives support law and order and safe streets. Conservatives deplore the kind of butchery we saw in El Paso as much or if not more than anyone else. Maybe this is an issue where bi partisan support can be found. The question then is how do we rebuild a mental illness program from scratch, how do we solve the problems of abuse that plagued the old system (which is why it died out back in 70s and 80s) and of course how do we pay for it. I would argue that mentality ill criminals walking our streets and creating havoc is costing us more than containing them would.
Attacking the second amendment is a non starter and will not happen. It would also be extremely ineffective as we have as many guns as people in America. Dealing with the mentally sick would IMO stop 90 percent of these events and we would go back to seeing these types of things at a rate we saw prior to the 1990s.
Extremely well said. This Conservative also says we need need to reopen mental hospitals
I am talking the type that used to commonly house thousands.
If people like the Wal Mart killer were in one, 20 innocent people would be alive.
There are people that cannot safely walk amongst civilized society.
These hospitals provided a useful option for society to maintain safety for the civilized.
States began closing mental asylums in the 50’s due to political embarrassment and lack of state funding.
It’s cheaper to house mentally ill with the General prison population.
Little is publicly known about the El Paso shooter. There is nothing yet to suggest a history of criminal behavior, let alone mental illness.
Stephen Paddock, shot nearly 500 people in Las Vegas. He, like millions of people, was a tad off in terms of socialization and obsession with gaming. He owned many firearms. So do hundreds of thousands of people. Absolutely nothing to suggest he would one day rampage on a massive crowd. Yet, he did and no one knows why he did what he did, as he planned.
The Sandy Hook shooter was troubled. His was anti- social, lived in his mother’s basement, anorexic and spent his time online gaming, chatting and plotting. His mother knew and seemed to enjoy taking him to the range for target practice. She was his first victim.
What possible objective criteria would be used to institutionalize people in absence of a history of violence?
But beyond any one person-We have millions on our streets who pose dangers to both themselves and the general public, and the closing of these places to safely house them was irresponsible.
Who was aware of the manifesto posted to 8 Chan SHORTLY before he rampaged on a Walmart, 10 hours away from his home?
You need to prove someone is a danger to themselves and/ others.
What possible objective criteria could be used to institutionalize “ the millions on our streets”.
I don't know if you remember this but when Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating (R) closed and downsized the mental health institutions in Oklahoma one of the former residents of Eastern State Hospital in Vinita was displaced. He ended up off his meds and went over to the local Vinita hospital and shot and killed an ER nurse.
Of course 'turtle face' Frank claimed it was an "isolated incident" and had nothing to do with the closure of the facility where the guy was living.
No one can be forced to take medications against their will, unless court- ordered to do so.
On the flip side, no shortage of people seem to believe mood altering prescription meds are the cause of the sensational mass shootings, despite no factual information to support the claim.
Who would have put him in one? Was there something in his background we haven't heard about? If so, please provide a link. If there is nothing to back that statement up, then it is nothing but deflection from the real problem, which is much too ready availabilty of semiautomatic weapons with high capacity magazines i public hands.
If we are going to deal with mental health, then let's require a mental health examination prior to purchasing any sort of firearm, and let's require a publicly accessible psychological exam for all prospective presidential candidates, starting with the hatemonger currently squatting in the OO.
Japan does a mental health evaluation as a part of an exstensive background check for gun ownership.
It’s costly and time consuming and most people don’t have an interest in gun ownership.
Israel does something similar and repeats it every 3-5 years.
The big diff is that gun ownership is a privilege, not a right in most countries.
I think we should jail the parents of any mass shooter. When you decide to create another person, you should be held responsible for what it does. If you cannot handle that, don’t have kids.
This makes no sense. On one hand in this thread, folks are saying mental illness is the cause of many of these shootings. I have always felt like folks never really thought this through, but by definition under the law, folks who are found mentally ill are often found not responsible for their actions. I doubt a lot of the right wingers proclaiming this is because of mental illness really feel the shooters are not responsible fo their actions
Now we have someone saying we should put the parents in jail for mass shooters, which in essence takes even nore responsibility off of the actual shooters. But you only say the parents of mass shooters. What about parents of people who only shoot one or two people? And is it only mass shooters you are talking about? What if someone bombs a place? Runs over folks with their cars? Knives people?
Just likke the folks who are blaming Trump's rhetoric, people should be more careful. Because when you start placing responsibility on their parents, right wing or left wing web sites or whoever happens to be president at that moment, you're taking some of te responsibility away from the actual murderer.
It would be worth every penny and cheaper in the long run to lock up mentally ill people for their own and the public's safety. We didn't have mass shooters when mental hospitals were in service.
It would be worth every penny and cheaper in the long run to lock up mentally ill people for their own and the public's safety. We didn't have mass shooters when mental hospitals were in service.
Simple question, what mentally illness gets people "locked up"?
Quote:
Mental illnesses are common in the United States. Nearly one in five U.S. adults live with a mental illness (46.6 million in 2017). Mental illnesses include many different conditions that vary in degree of severity, ranging from mild to moderate to severe.
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.
