In a discussion on Fox News this morning regarding the public’s reaction, one commentator says “Expect the people to go after the low hanging fruit first, that is guns and mental illness.” Most of you are well tuned into the complexities of the gun issue. You are not
however, as informed about the mental health issue.
Reader Guy Faulkes asks Blogger: “Do you think people have the right to protect themselves from the violent menially ill? How would you do it?” Here is an article On Going Debate On Mental Illness addressing both sides of the mental health issue. It is hoped you will take the time to read both sides. Like the gun issue, there is no simple solution.
For those who don’t feel a need to be informed on this subject, to save you the time, here is the summarizing statement of each:
For involuntary commitment: "The opposition to involuntary committal and treatment betrays a profound understanding of the principle of civil liberties. Medication can free victims from their illness-free them from the Bastille of their psychoses-and restore their dignity, their free will, and the meaningful exercise of their liberties."
Against involuntary treatment: "Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent, moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.... To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level with those who have not yet reached the age of reason."
22 comments:
I still do not know the answer and I still think every case is an individual situation with many things to consider. Has the mentally ill person harmed anyone? Is he likely to do so? If he is likely, has he committed a crime? Has he harmed himself? Is he likely to do so? Would this be a crime? Has he committed any crime as a result of his illness? Is he innocent by reason of insanity or is he guilty for the same reason? If he has committed a crime and been institutionalized and is treated to the point he has somewhat recovered from his illness, how do you make certain he stays on the medication if he has been released from an institution such as a hospital or jail? Are the rights of the mentally ill the same as that of everyone else? If not, why? Are the responsibilities of the mentally ill the same as anyone else? If not, why?
I would very much like to hear your opinion on these questions, Blogger. I do not know any of the answers.
I only know that when someone attempts to hurt someone else for no valid reason, you have to do something about it, either as the intended victim or as a member of society. The intended victim has an easier time because he only has to be concerned about stopping the mentally ill person at the time the incident occurs. Society has to determine how to do it both before and after the fact.
Guy, I believe you are asking me to talk on the two two mental illness laws However, these are not part of the present discussion in that the shooter is dead.
What I am interested in is the two knee jerk reactions which always follow a tragedy such as this one. The first simplistic reaction is “Take away the guns.” The second is “force mental health treatment.”
On the gun part, I can live with the loss of assault weapons and the big clips. And, on the forced treatment, I am with Dr. Torrey.
They are magazines not "clips". I find that most people willing to give up to the Left on guns, know the least about the guns.
Sorry- above comment is mine.
Feinstein who is introducing the bill is calling them clips.
I am doubting MS Feinstein is heavy into high capacity semi-automatic rifles. I doubt she knows which end of the rifle the bullet comes out.
Most of the MSM are calling them automatic weapons. Most of the media says you don't need them for duck hunting. These are the people who will decide what happens to something in which they have little knowledge, only emotions.
In fact, they are not even assault weapons.
Blogger, it is more than a knee jerk reaction. It is a political ploy to use a tragedy for leverage that the anti gunners have used for years. They do it so frequently that many people think they stage these tragedies.
An assault rifle is one that is capable of select fire. In other words, it can fire in full automatic mode as does a machine gun or in semi automatic mode as does a huge portion of all kinds of guns. I suspect you are talking about a semi automatic such as an AR15 that functions only in semi automatic mode as do many other hunting guns, competition guns, and guns for self defense. (The AR is all of those.)
The magazine issue is ridiculous. You ca change them in seconds.
If you do not want one of these type guns, then by all means, do not buy one. Just do not try to tell me I cannot because of what somebody else did.
As far as the mental health issue is concerned, I do not know what to think about forced treatment. As I tried to point out, people have to protect themselves, but those that are mentally ill, suspected of being mentally ill, or being accused of being mentally ill still have the same rights as the rest of us. To act differently is the same as prejudging a person on the basis of his race or religion. After all, a professional diagnosing someone to be mentally ill is called a professional OPINION. I do not consider my opinion to be a knee jerk reaction.
This is one of the reasons that I think armed and trained teachers as well as parents that have a CCW permit is the best way to stop violence in gun free school zones that are target rich safe havens for these people.
Instead of trying to ban inanimate objects, we should do away with laws creating gun free school zones so children can be protected.
I heard a news reporter say the AR in AR-15 stands for assault rifle. It does not, it is from the trade name Armalite.
Mass Shootings
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/december_2012/following_school_shooting_86_want_more_action_to_identify_and_treat_mental_illness
I, like most of my fellow conservatives here LOVE guns! Guns, guns, guns. Semi-automatic rifles are the best, as they can take down a squirrel in less than 50 shots. I know that those who created our great nation were well aware that weapons would evolve to house 30+ rounds per magazine & that we can use them to shoot whatever the hell we want. They may have had a single shot musket at the time, but I prefer to protect myself with a Bushmaster because I'm a real man. Guns don't kill people, people kill people....With....Guns. Ted Nugent rules!! 'Merica!
Well, we have heard from the troll that can make no logical arguments.
And if you will note, along with Brain Child, criminal thugs today only have single shot muskets. If we do have to take down a tyrannical government, they will have only single shot muskets... just like the Syrian and Libyan governments.
Brain Washed clean of the ability to discern, I'd say.
Brain Child- Do you think Ben Franklin was one of "those who created our great nation" who thought things made by man would not evolve. How stupid do you think our "those who created our great nation" were. You must be smarter then them, Washed Brain and all.
Bloggeer, I go on several other blog sites, most of them gun sites (pun intended). All of them are for registering and controlling the mentally ill.
Frankly, this scares the crap out of me because I have heard of to many instances where involuntary commitment was used to remove harmless people from society for other reasons than them being a danger. For instance, a minister once tried to have my uncle committed for saying man would walk on the moon in his life time.
Political beliefs could as easily be the excuse for such commitments. As far as I know, there are little to no safeguards from this as there are in criminal cases.
Just what civil rights do those accused of mental illness have? There is no trial by their peers, as far as I know.
I found this interesting. Note the look on Whoopi's face when he talks about guns.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyKvTn5BT5c
Guy Faulkes- Your link above was the best I've heard so far on the subject. It included much of what Blogger wrote. I am going to watch it again. I long thought the violent video games, the exaggerated violence in movies, the rap "music", and the social move from self-responsibility is what is killing our society. What I don't understand is what brain disorder allows it to become reality in some and in others it doesn't lead to murder. But the Doctor is right about the ignoring of people who are obviously "different" by everybody (except bullies) may be the catalyst.
Whoopi keeps a shotgun leaned up against the wall next to her bed in her Connecticut mansion on 40 acres. It is not locked up, has no trigger lock, and appears to be modified.
A warning to others: If you watch the Guy Faulke's video link, disregard the advice to "Note Whoopi's face". This may cause projectile regurgitation.
Oh my goodness! an amazing article dude.
Thank you However
I am experiencing challenge with ur rss . Don’t know why Unable
to subscribe to it. Is there anyone getting identical rss drawback?
Anyone who knows kindly respond. Thnkxxx
Also visit my website : http://logic.Wiki.sapir.ac.Il/
You need to participate in a contest for the most effective blogs
on the web. I'll
advocate this website!
My weblog :: http://lowes.pixnet.net/
fantastic points altogether, you just received a
brand new reader. What could you recommend in regards to your
post that you simply made some days ago? Any sure?
Here is my weblog :: www.mainetodo.com
My web page > http://drytekenvironmental.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:NancyDiaz85
Post a Comment