billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,484
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jun 18, 2015 13:54:02 GMT -5
There are many States where it is very easy to get a concealed or even in some cases a open permit..then there are many where it is just about impossible...example..Massachusetts, Connectiicut...New York... ... You posted about an incident in South Carolina and suggested the we consider changing laws to help prevent that type of incident. Since the law of the state in which the incident occurred is what you propose changing laws to allow, it is clear that your solution did not prevent the incident in South Carolina. Why should other states adopt a proposal that clearly didn't work?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 18, 2015 13:58:26 GMT -5
I'm against places like churches that post no guns allowed. That's just posting that you're "sitting ducks." I ignore those signs. I'd rather lose my license to carry concealed than my life.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jun 18, 2015 14:01:41 GMT -5
Hey you all.......
"After the murder of innocents I am wondering time to consider allowing people to carry firearms if they want to..."
is what the thread was posted at by me...not a discussion of the mentally ill..how they relate to violence against others and how they are treated in the USA..or a comparison of gun laws and the mentally ill in Canada vs the same in the USA...
My question was , with what I perceive..and I admit that I may be swayed by the headlines today ..as a big increase in these seemingly random act against "groups vs individuals..and complete innocents that no planning , in my mind, could conceive of protecting against..Children, educators..Connecticut..the latest , in a church during worship...sporting event...marathon in Boston..participants as well spectators..On a Army base...by a serving officer against his own..and probably more as well.....a Texas cafeteria some years ago..
My thoughts are that , for those who chose to carry...and there is no guarantee that armed folks would have been able to completely stop a attack or in some cases even mitigate the fall out and number of casualties..thinking the Boston bomb attack...but in others..the church, the school, the army base attack..possible the perp taken down earlier , less casualties...
As far as the arguments of " it would just increase the amount of weapons in the hands..", my feeling is we have lost that battle and there is no going back..over 300 million arms in the hands of the American populace..second amendment rights yadda yadda...that turkey has already flown the coop..and as far as gang members able to legally carry and even carry openly to intimidate..seems they have access already..seem to have no problem carrying and I never suggested that back ground checks , objections legally by enforcement people against certain folks getting these permits....{ I believe by the time a person affiliates themselves with a gang there is a high probability that they have already run a foul of the law..have some type of record on file..}..be curtailed or stopped...
My thoughts , and that is just what it is, thoughts not a promotion of..just to consider..easing the restrictions on and lesson the problems of getting a carry permit for those who wish for these permits....still having to pass a safety course and legal course of how and when can use deadly force...reason for this is because of personal and also group protection against those who do these attacks..understanding that official police protection may be a while before being present and able to stop these attacks...
Not really interested here in the mental health of these folks who commit these acts..in my book they are all disturbed ..more to the point..NUTS..and while I have great respect for my neighbor to the North and wish them only the best..{so many live with me for six months of the year ..being very unhappy with the weather you folks have up there..those temperatures , no matter how you spin it..they are nuts...below what ever day after day..}
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jun 18, 2015 14:06:44 GMT -5
I'm against places like churches that post no guns allowed. That's just posting that you're "sitting ducks." I ignore those signs. I'd rather lose my license to carry concealed than my life. I think I addressed that point Zib....agtree with you..just would suggest be a bit restrained in mentioning it to anyone or doing so openly which I am sure you wouldn't...
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 18, 2015 14:11:28 GMT -5
The idea of concealed is that NO ONE but you should know you're doing it.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 18, 2015 14:16:03 GMT -5
Looks like the genie is out of the bottle and there's no going back. You can't impose gun control on a nation where there are more weapons than people. Evidently, the solution to gun violence is more guns. That being said, it's one of the main reasons I'm against a US/Canada open border. We don't want that crap over here.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Jun 18, 2015 14:31:56 GMT -5
@rockit - the vast majority of people with mental illnesses do not commit violent crimes. What we hear about are the exceptions, and we hear about them exactly because it is rare and thus newsworthy. Of course no one has the right to kill others, but the opposite is true as well - no one has the right to lock someone away simply because they have a mental illness. If someone is committing a crime then they should be punished for it, yes. But we should not punish someone simply because we think they may commit a crime. Would you suggest we lock away everyone who has tried drugs? How about anyone who has taken a drink then gotten behind the wheel of a car - because we know some small percentage of that population will someday drink too much and kill someone? I'd like to see people with mental illnesses get treatment, but the fact that they may be mentally ill does not give society the right to lock them up. I hate to see this stuff as well, but it's always easy to see the "signs" after the fact. How many people present the same signs but don't act on them? Those numbers may be higher than either one of us would be comfortable with. I am speaking to severe mental illness, as I said. I never suggested people that had done nothing get locked up. But once they start committing crimes, showing they are not capable of controlling their actions, then they should get intervention because they have entered the system. Its not about "signs people missed" or hindsight, its about people demonstrating repeatedly that there is an issue, and their freedom trumps everyone else's safety, including the victims. If your life was legitimately threatened by a person who is mentally unstable (lets assume it is severe since they are threatening your life), how would you feel if the only penalty was them getting locked up for a couple days & then they are out to harass or target you again? Who's freedom should be protected in cases like that? Look, I'm just a faceless poster on a message board so you may or may not choose to believe me. You know that old saying about letting ten killers go free rather than execute one innocent man? I value individual freedom too much to give that kind of power to the state under the pretense of protecting society in general. I wouldn't be able to live with myself knowing I was responsible for taking away another person's freedom on the suspicion that something may happen to me. I wouldn't want the state to have that kind of power. Yea, if I really felt threatened I'd carry - I'm not stupid. AND if someone actually did harm to someone they would be punished. Cases like this (no prior physical crimes) are the exception and I still say we can't lock up every disenfranchised loner simply because we think they may go off someday. BTW - threatening someones life is, I think a serious offense. I don't think that is what happened here though.
|
|
haapai
Junior Associate
Character
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:40:06 GMT -5
Posts: 5,893
|
Post by haapai on Jun 18, 2015 14:40:03 GMT -5
Ya know, this thread is gonna look really silly if it turns out that Roof owned a .45 but not a permit to carry it.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 18, 2015 14:48:36 GMT -5
Ya know, this thread is gonna look really silly if it turns out that Roof owned a .45 but not a permit to carry it. Why? There are quite a few advocates for no-permit, open-carry gun laws.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,484
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jun 18, 2015 14:57:29 GMT -5
... My thoughts are that , for those who chose to carry...and there is no guarantee that armed folks would have been able to completely stop a attack or in some cases even mitigate the fall out and number of casualties..thinking the Boston bomb attack...but in others..the church, the school, the army base attack..possible the perp taken down earlier , less casualties... ... Please also take into account the possibility of more casualties if minimally trained people start pulling out guns and start shooting.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jun 18, 2015 14:57:50 GMT -5
Hey you all....... "After the murder of innocents I am wondering time to consider allowing people to carry firearms if they want to..."is what the thread was posted at by me...not a discussion of the mentally ill..how they relate to violence against others and how they are treated in the USA..or a comparison of gun laws and the mentally ill in Canada vs the same in the USA... My question was , with what I perceive..and I admit that I may be swayed by the headlines today ..as a big increase in these seemingly random act against "groups vs individuals..and complete innocents that no planning , in my mind, could conceive of protecting against..Children, educators..Connecticut..the latest , in a church during worship...sporting event...marathon in Boston..participants as well spectators..On a Army base...by a serving officer against his own..and probably more as well.....a Texas cafeteria some years ago.. My thoughts are that , for those who chose to carry...and there is no guarantee that armed folks would have been able to completely stop a attack or in some cases even mitigate the fall out and number of casualties..thinking the Boston bomb attack...but in others..the church, the school, the army base attack..possible the perp taken down earlier , less casualties... As far as the arguments of " it would just increase the amount of weapons in the hands..", my feeling is we have lost that battle and there is no going back..over 300 million arms in the hands of the American populace..second amendment rights yadda yadda...that turkey has already flown the coop..and as far as gang members able to legally carry and even carry openly to intimidate..seems they have access already..seem to have no problem carrying and I never suggested that back ground checks , objections legally by enforcement people against certain folks getting these permits....{ I believe by the time a person affiliates themselves with a gang there is a high probability that they have already run a foul of the law..have some type of record on file..}..be curtailed or stopped... My thoughts , and that is just what it is, thoughts not a promotion of..just to consider..easing the restrictions on and lesson the problems of getting a carry permit for those who wish for these permits....still having to pass a safety course and legal course of how and when can use deadly force...reason for this is because of personal and also group protection against those who do these attacks..understanding that official police protection may be a while before being present and able to stop these attacks... Not really interested here in the mental health of these folks who commit these acts..in my book they are all disturbed ..more to the point..NUTS..and while I have great respect for my neighbor to the North and wish them only the best..{so many live with me for six months of the year ..being very unhappy with the weather you folks have up there..those temperatures , no matter how you spin it..they are nuts...below what ever day after day..} You do realize you are backing Paul's argument about arming the populance.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 20:02:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2015 17:11:18 GMT -5
Yay! I almost wish he would have fought capture and we'd be done with him. This little punk coward makes me madder than the rest of the punk cowards that do this kind of thing.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 20:02:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2015 17:21:06 GMT -5
he was on drugs for mental illness, maybe it is time we started thinking about the side effects of some of these mind drugs, who knows
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 20:02:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2015 17:28:30 GMT -5
When these kind of terrible things happen, it is helpful to me to remember that America is getting less violent and dangerous. We are doing some things right apparently.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jun 18, 2015 17:29:15 GMT -5
... My thoughts are that , for those who chose to carry...and there is no guarantee that armed folks would have been able to completely stop a attack or in some cases even mitigate the fall out and number of casualties..thinking the Boston bomb attack...but in others..the church, the school, the army base attack..possible the perp taken down earlier , less casualties... ... Please also take into account the possibility of more casualties if minimally trained people start pulling out guns and start shooting. There is always that type of scenario...actually in service I was horrible with a hand gun...literally, with very short target ranges..think 25 yards...lucky to hit the target anywhere...but that was not my weapon to carry ...[actually picked up a couple in after actions]...never thought to have to use them...but there are many who are quite proficient with them and my feeling is that those who chose to apply for a carry will , for the most part, always exceptions to the rule, will get instruction..use ranges...become proficient in use of just because..I know I would... The only sane way for a civilien to be involved IMHO is if they or theirs are directly threatened as in the scenarios enumerated by me here..the very recent church incident..the Conn school...anywhere were a psycho would show up to do harm...not to go look for trouble or be the savior of what ever...First thing is to find safety..look for professional help..{cops } and respond directly to the threat...at least have a fighting chance for survival for family, self...others in then vicinity. All these scenarios such as what you brought up are considered...it boils down to , as the premise of my thread..a change of heart by me and a thought by me..possible..if these incidents are becoming more common and possible will increase in time..my thought on what is happening over seas and our involvement and bad guys wanting some payback..possible a change should be made in how we look at and mandate the right for average folks to be able to be armed if at all...especially in parts of the country where it is not now that easy to be armed ..get a carry permit...Again just a thought thrown out there...
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jun 18, 2015 17:34:25 GMT -5
Hey you all....... "After the murder of innocents I am wondering time to consider allowing people to carry firearms if they want to..."is what the thread was posted at by me...not a discussion of the mentally ill..how they relate to violence against others and how they are treated in the USA..or a comparison of gun laws and the mentally ill in Canada vs the same in the USA... My question was , with what I perceive..and I admit that I may be swayed by the headlines today ..as a big increase in these seemingly random act against "groups vs individuals..and complete innocents that no planning , in my mind, could conceive of protecting against..Children, educators..Connecticut..the latest , in a church during worship...sporting event...marathon in Boston..participants as well spectators..On a Army base...by a serving officer against his own..and probably more as well.....a Texas cafeteria some years ago.. My thoughts are that , for those who chose to carry...and there is no guarantee that armed folks would have been able to completely stop a attack or in some cases even mitigate the fall out and number of casualties..thinking the Boston bomb attack...but in others..the church, the school, the army base attack..possible the perp taken down earlier , less casualties... As far as the arguments of " it would just increase the amount of weapons in the hands..", my feeling is we have lost that battle and there is no going back..over 300 million arms in the hands of the American populace..second amendment rights yadda yadda...that turkey has already flown the coop..and as far as gang members able to legally carry and even carry openly to intimidate..seems they have access already..seem to have no problem carrying and I never suggested that back ground checks , objections legally by enforcement people against certain folks getting these permits....{ I believe by the time a person affiliates themselves with a gang there is a high probability that they have already run a foul of the law..have some type of record on file..}..be curtailed or stopped... My thoughts , and that is just what it is, thoughts not a promotion of..just to consider..easing the restrictions on and lesson the problems of getting a carry permit for those who wish for these permits....still having to pass a safety course and legal course of how and when can use deadly force...reason for this is because of personal and also group protection against those who do these attacks..understanding that official police protection may be a while before being present and able to stop these attacks... Not really interested here in the mental health of these folks who commit these acts..in my book they are all disturbed ..more to the point..NUTS..and while I have great respect for my neighbor to the North and wish them only the best..{so many live with me for six months of the year ..being very unhappy with the weather you folks have up there..those temperatures , no matter how you spin it..they are nuts...below what ever day after day..} You do realize you are backing Paul's argument about arming the populance. Armed only those who want the responsibility of the carry...hopefully well trained and never looking for trouble..not their responsibility to hunt down bad guys..break up disputes..only self and family and friends protection...understand too, I hadn't mentioned that..for most who have been in situations were they became active and if actually participated and done harm to others..most of those, and they have been conditioned by training , do have after action reactions..sometimes briefly , other times for life ..off and on...Another responsibility one should consider as one opts for a permit...
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,515
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jun 18, 2015 18:14:53 GMT -5
Yay! I almost wish he would have fought capture and we'd be done with him. This little punk coward makes me madder than the rest of the punk cowards that do this kind of thing.
I am glad he was taken alive. I want to know what makes people like him tick. The more we can learn about people like him, the better prepared we could be in the future.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Jun 18, 2015 19:21:45 GMT -5
That's a lot of wishing & hoping on your part.
The problem is that RESPONSIBLE people/gun owners don't go around shooting up schools, churches, etc etc.
It's the loose laws that allow the nut-jobs to possess - and most don't have any formal training in the handling and shooting of weapons.
There's either not thorough enough screening, or too many (unregistered) guns sold "under the table" to any wackadoodle who has the money/connections to pay for it - and a reason to want it - which usually isn't for personal protection or the sport of target shooting.
Lax screening and laws on firearm ownership in the US is laughable.
I've been in gun shops in the US in the past with DH since we were both gun owners/shooters (for sport) - the obsession with weapons down there is something else.
It was scary that DH (as a Canadian citizen) could have bought any weapon of his choosing without so much as a second glance down there if he'd wanted to.
.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 20:02:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2015 20:13:48 GMT -5
Was the gun that his Dad gave him the one used in the shootings? If it was, I wonder what his Dad is thinking now.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,515
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jun 18, 2015 20:19:52 GMT -5
Was the gun that his Dad gave him the one used in the shootings? If it was, I wonder what his Dad is thinking now. "Atta boy."?
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jun 18, 2015 20:24:25 GMT -5
I have to wonder where he learned his hatred for black people. His middle name is Storm. Like Stormfront? People usually learn hatred at home. There isn't always a racist connotation to a name like storm. If I had my kids when I was younger I would have named them Stone or Storm. No racial reasons...I just thought they were awesome names. Then I matured and opted to go a different route
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 20:02:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2015 1:41:10 GMT -5
The above is from the OP (including thread title). Is the OP suggesting that MORE people should be allowed to carry firearms if they want to?
Aren't there enough crazies running around the US killing people with easily obtained weapons as it is?
Here in Canada our gun laws and possession of a weapon are much tighter. Our crime rate (armed robberies, etc), and deaths caused by shootings is also much lower.
There are a lot more hoops to jump through in order to obtain/possess a weapon. (I know what it takes, since DH and I both had rifles and handguns used for competitive target shooting, etc).
Yes, there are guns available the black market here, but again that number is also much lower. I don't get it, either. How can the solution to rampant gun crime be more guns? That's because you are misunderstanding the equation. More guns isn't the solution to "rampant gun crime", More guns is the solution to the question of "How do we allow our citizens to protect themselves when we KNOW that there are guns out there that can be used against them AND we know that the Police cannot be everywhere all the time?"
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jun 19, 2015 2:23:07 GMT -5
I don't get it, either. How can the solution to rampant gun crime be more guns? That's because you are misunderstanding the equation. More guns isn't the solution to "rampant gun crime", More guns is the solution to the question of "How do we allow our citizens to protect themselves when we KNOW that there are guns out there that can be used against them AND we know that the Police cannot be everywhere all the time?" That in a nut shell is basically what the premise of this thread I put up is all about. I threw that out because I am having second thoughts because of violent actions like this one in S Carolina..Connecticut..Boston..{ I realize a armed populace would not have helped in that situation..two home made bombs placed..plenty of armed law enforcement in area..} and other such doings.. If there were more armed citizens..when things like this happen, while no guarantee of salvation, possible there might be actions taken that just might mitigate the casualties...There is no guarantee though ,..In military combat..one of the hardest things to guarantee is to have troops return fire ...go on the offensive..and those young folks have gone through intensive training..much more then any civiliens would go through..That's what so many squad / fire team leaders jobs turned out to be..getting their people to expose their position ..return fire besides advance under fire..especially new troops..why so many became casualties themselves.. big responsibility . However , with all that said...if some one has been trained..kept it up...if found in such a violent situation...rather then just take it..possible offensive action may/ might be taken , especially if self or family and friends were threatened..as said above..Police can't be everywhere all the time...
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Jun 19, 2015 6:23:43 GMT -5
Mental illness or not, this guy is a RACIST. His FRIEND said he was a racist. I think that pretty much says it all.
Why can't we stop excusing horrible behaviour with "mental illness" and deal with it appropriately?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 19, 2015 9:29:09 GMT -5
Was the gun that his Dad gave him the one used in the shootings? If it was, I wonder what his Dad is thinking now. Probably that he's going to get his ass sued.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 20:02:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2015 9:52:21 GMT -5
Was the gun that his Dad gave him the one used in the shootings? If it was, I wonder what his Dad is thinking now. "Atta boy."? Even if the he learned to hate black people from his Dad, I would think his Dad can't be happy that he gave his son the tool that was used to ruin his life. Even if the Dad doesn't give 2 shits that people died since they were black, maybe he cares about his son. But one never knows what goes on in other people's head.
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Jun 19, 2015 9:58:50 GMT -5
There are a lot of racists. Certainly I know a lot of racists. People that spout nasty and incomprehensible things.
None of them ever killed anyone.
Just bc none of the racists that you know killed anyone, doesn't mean there aren't who did or would.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jun 19, 2015 10:39:11 GMT -5
I don't have a problem with concealed carry laws. A fee and training seem reasonable. Presumably they got the background check when they bought the gun.
I'm don't agree with arming as many as possible, but the option should be there for those who want it.
Personally, I have no interest in owning a gun. But would consider it if I felt threatened for some reason.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,515
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jun 19, 2015 10:39:38 GMT -5
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,902
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 19, 2015 11:27:08 GMT -5
I am speaking to severe mental illness, as I said. I never suggested people that had done nothing get locked up. But once they start committing crimes, showing they are not capable of controlling their actions, then they should get intervention because they have entered the system. Its not about "signs people missed" or hindsight, its about people demonstrating repeatedly that there is an issue, and their freedom trumps everyone else's safety, including the victims. If your life was legitimately threatened by a person who is mentally unstable (lets assume it is severe since they are threatening your life), how would you feel if the only penalty was them getting locked up for a couple days & then they are out to harass or target you again? Who's freedom should be protected in cases like that? Believe it or not Rockit I agree with you. I also have deep seated fears about anyone being able to easily lock people up. I also have a realistic understanding that there aren't any easy answers to this. The biggest problem with a lot of Mental Illness is that it can be successfully treated. So that a MI person can be contained and medicated to the point that they are no longer threats to themselves or others, but then once released there is a high rate of non-compliance with medication. So what do you do there? You legally can't force people to medicate (or maybe you can now...) What do you do in those situations (which I would hazard a guess is a very high percentage of the mentally ill). I think we don't lock people up early enough or long enough in general, but the minute you say that then you are countered with "No we must rehabilitate... too many people locked up... bad bad" So we in many cases had our chance to get these folks off the street and we did not do it. Regardless of Mental Illness. Group homes with other MI people. Not 'locked up' but given a room at a house where there is some supervision so that, if they stop taking their meds and get into a bad state of mind again, someone can step in and refer them back to a hospital to get back on track again, before they injure themselves or someone else. Since people with MI are a big part of the chronic homeless, and they end up on the receiving end of a lot of violence and crime, getting them into safe shelters where they get a place to sleep and regular food would significantly improve their quality of life and safety, as well as reduce their medical costs. Won't happen, though, because this isn't an issue that gets a lot of attention and support. There is also going to be a huge amount of public resistance against locating a home for 'crazies' in the neighborhood, and resistance against paying to provide food and shelter to people who appear normal and able bodied, as long as they stay on their meds.
|
|