Do we have a "gun problem" or a "mental health problem"?

[88GT]

Lets see the guy who did the Colorado shooting was a hardcore OWS type and into the anarchist movement. That is not a conservative (right wing).

If we go through all those who have been involved in shootings lately, lots of ties to various leftwing causes.

There is a difference between who may or may not be responsible for certain things and your solution advocating denial of rights for everybody based on a standard you can't even define.

Assuming that there is truth to your claim that the responsible parties of these violent acts are largely coming from one side of the political spectrum, you should be asking yourself why this is so. Lefties aren't the only ones with mental problems. So either this is a back door attempt to lock up political opponents based on convenient trends or you are missing the causal variable for the disparity in outcomes.

 

[res04]

Liberals like to blame everything and everyone except themselves and their policies.

 

[Trooper]

I'd have to spend a helluva lot less if people like you weren't trying to use the government to control me.

Would you rather that your community resorted to just lynched you instead? That used to happen.

Look If I wanted to control you, I would just take you out by myself or with a few friends. After I am more concerned about my life than yours. If you are mentally ill then you are a threat to me thus I have the right (in terms of self preservation) to kill you. The strong have always controlled the weak.

 

[Trooper]

There is a difference between who may or may not be responsible for certain things and your solution advocating denial of rights for everybody based on a standard you can't even define.

Assuming that there is truth to your claim that the responsible parties of these violent acts are largely coming from one side of the political spectrum, you should be asking yourself why this is so. Lefties aren't the only ones with mental problems. So either this is a back door attempt to lock up political opponents based on convenient trends or you are missing the causal variable for the disparity in outcomes.

Of course! But liberalism is a mental disorder in the first place thus it attracts loonies. If you substitize a behavior, you get more of it.

We have dealt very harshly in the past towards those with mental health problems. We do not need to go back to that level. But when there is a clear danger to society, why not take them out?

 

[steveh_131]

Of course! But liberalism is a mental disorder in the first place thus it attracts loonies. If you substitize a behavior, you get more of it.

We have dealt very harshly in the past towards those with mental health problems. We do not need to go back to that level. But when there is a clear danger to society, why not take them out?

Trooper, have you been drinking?

 

[Trooper]

Trooper, have you been drinking?

Reality.

 

[steveh_131]

Reality.

Is that a brand of tequila or something?

 

[88GT]

Would you rather that your community resorted to just lynched you instead? That used to happen.

That's your solution? Why do you assume that it is either "legal" pre-emptive incarceration or just lynching? Are those really the only two solutions you have?

Look If I wanted to control you, I would just take you out by myself or with a few friends.

So you do think removal from society is the only solution.

If you are mentally ill then you are a threat to me

How do you figure that? Are you so daft that you think all mental illness is associated with violent behavior?

thus I have the right (in terms of self preservation) to kill you.

You do not. You have the right to defend yourself against imminent bodily harm or death. I have to present a clear and present danger to one of those before you have any legal clearance to take action. Mental illness on my part in no way meets that standard. You scare the hell out of me. You really do.

The strong have always controlled the weak.

What does that have to do with anything? Are you arguing that status quo is justification for itself? If that's the case then I want a slave. Make slavery legal and then it will be justified. And it will be the perfect manifestation of you "might makes right" argument.

 

[steveh_131]

Speaking of mental illness, let's talk about extreme narcissism and how it applies to some in this thread.

Legitimate reason to remove someone from society?

 

[Trooper]

Think about it folks, what is the legitimate reasons for putting someone under supervision (does not mean confinement but would include it)? A person has to do something. Either a crime in terms of a felony or a series of actions that demonstrate that the person is harmful and is getting worst.

Think of how hard it is to get someone convicted, the Bisard case is a good example. Mental illness has even a harder burden of proof. And it is on the state (or the family) to prove that the individual is dangerous. Not just doctors' opinions but actions that have shown that the individual will harm others.

 

[88GT]

Think about it folks, what is the legitimate reasons for putting someone under supervision (does not mean confinement but would include it)? A person has to do something. Either a crime in terms of a felony or a series of actions that demonstrate that the person is harmful and is getting worst.

Think of how hard it is to get someone convicted, the Bisard case is a good example. Mental illness has even a harder burden of proof. And it is on the state (or the family) to prove that the individual is dangerous. Not just doctors' opinions but actions that have shown that the individual will harm others.

You've convinced me. And you're the first person I want locked up.

 

[Trooper]

You've convinced me. And you're the first person I want locked up.

What grounds? And do you have the lawyers powerful enough to fight mine?

 

[88GT]

What grounds? And do you have the lawyers powerful enough to fight mine?

You're a threat. We all know what I can do to a threat, right?

 

[steveh_131]

What grounds? And do you have the lawyers powerful enough to fight mine?

Narcissistic personality disorder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Symptoms of this disorder, as defined by the DSM-IV-TR include:[SUP][1][/SUP]

• Expects to be recognized as superior and special, without superior accomplishments
• Expects constant attention, admiration and positive reinforcement from others
• Envies others and believes others envy him/her
• Is preoccupied with thoughts and fantasies of great success, enormous attractiveness, power, intelligence
• Lacks the ability to empathize with the feelings or desires of others
• Is arrogant in attitudes and behavior
• Has expectations of special treatment that are unrealistic

 

[ViperJock]

What grounds? And do you have the lawyers powerful enough to fight mine?

ROFL. No. But my dad can beat up your dad.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Do we have more instances of individuals with mental health issues than other nations? Serious question.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

Do we have more instances of individuals with mental health issues than other nations? Serious question.

My guess is: Probably.

But that's a factor of A) population and B) diagnosis/overdiagnosis.

(Like the skyrocketing diagnoses of Autism-spectrum disorders. More and more things are being classified on that spectrum; ergo, more people are diagnosed with "autism" these days vs. X-years ago.

 

[Trooper]

Do we have more instances of individuals with mental health issues than other nations? Serious question.

We over diagnosis. For example the American Scholar pointed out that half those at Harvard are on some form of head meds.

The use of head meds can also create a problem in some people.

The question is what is the standard for mental health problems that would justify court intervention? I am not sure that there is one. Oh, it is clear after the fact that the person was a danger. And it is easy to see how that person had problems leading up him doing mass murder. But try doing that as an intervention. Not so easy.

 

[rambone]

The abuse part of this would happen if it is too easy. After all 60% of felons are emotionally ill. And another 20% are mentally ill. Over 70% have been in foster care (early childhood abuse).

Here we go again... Source? Source? Source?

Do you have any idea how many felons exist in this country?? The Sentencing Project estimates 5.85 million.

So.. 4 million of them were in foster care?

The question is whether punish all of society via a gun ban or to limit the rights of the few (mentally ill)?

If you think rights can/should be limited then you don't understand what a right is.

You believe in government-granted privileges that can be taken away at any time.

If you are mentally ill then you are a threat to me thus I have the right (in terms of self preservation) to kill you. The strong have always controlled the weak.

Yikes. Sounds like you want to do a lot of killing.

Did you know that 20% of the nation is being prescribed mind-altering psychotropic drugs? If these drug peddlers are correct in their diagnoses, that's a lot of mental illness to cull. (Here is my source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/753789)

 

[rambone]

The question is what is the standard for mental health problems that would justify court intervention? I am not sure that there is one. Oh, it is clear after the fact that the person was a danger. And it is easy to see how that person had problems leading up him doing mass murder. But try doing that as an intervention. Not so easy.

More mass murder has been done by people pledging safety than all the mentally ill combined.