2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,334
- 52,581
- 2,290
Simple answer, not so simple to actually do. Enforce the laws we already have, simple, sort of, straight forward for sure. However, we do need to take a hard look (at ALL levels of government from federal to local) at what those laws are, and use facts, reason and science to determine their effectiveness. This aspect also needs to include a comprehensive look at the effectiveness of our judicial system; based again on facts, reason and the use of scientific evidence, to determine the effectiveness of of said system. Then keep what makes sense, and change what has proven to have a level of effectiveness that is unacceptable. Not so simple now, is it?Perhaps we should treat mass shootings like all other murders and not look for a "special" solution. Truth is that it's the idea that it's a special sort of crime that is creating all the trouble.
The mass murders are a small part of death via violent acts in the USA, but they get a huge lion's share of the media coverage and are studied like virtually no other crime. 17 died at Parkland and that is a tragedy of terrible proportions. The media covered it almost non stop for days and has covered it intermittently since and we all know more about that shooting than we know what happened in our our respective communities this week.
Hundreds of kids die on Chicago streets, in the projects, etc. every year that passes and the vast majority of us never hear about them except as a statistic. And that is repeated to various degrees in other cities across the country.
I want an honest national discussion on why this keeps happening and what needs to happen to stop it.
Simple. Enforce the laws we have and mandatory treatment of the mentally ill if they are judged to be a threat to society.
As to the treatment of the mentally ill... What does that mean? Who decides what "mentally ill" is defined as? How does this "treatment" work in practice? Who pays for it? These, and many other, questions must be asked and adequately answered before ANY real proposals can be contemplated and debated. Then, and only then, can we, as a society, fairly evaluate what we want to be done, how we want it to be done, who we want to do it, and what oversight (if any) we want in place to minimise abuses. At that point, we can, finally, discuss proposals to change the law(s). So, this aspect is even more complex, especially given that the mental health profession is highly subjective, and therefore more susceptible to abuses than other disciplines of health care.
All who are "mentally ill" deserve treatment, but those who pose a threat to themselves and/or others are the ones we must focus on in this context. If they are that ill, they are not competent to decide on what treatment they should receive. So, a Judge, using the diagnosis and advice of a psychiatrist should decide for them and assign them to a facility to be treated and cared for until they are no longer a danger to themselves and others.
A lot of mental illness is immediately observable, but as we can see here there are sociopaths who are pretty much blind to human empathy and sanity, and are incapable of making any sort of decisions without endless sophistry and hubris over what the meaning of 'is' is. These loons are the problem, they've been led to believe they should be taken seriously as 'Deciders N Stuff', and add in the idiotic narrative that 'nothing in the past ever worked, and they wuz all backwards and bigoted and we need trendy fashionable 'NewThink' now! Cuz, pop psychology has the answers to everything!
The actually dangerous mentally ill people, the shooters...didn't hide what they were.....not even the Florida shooter....we just need to clear up how to deal with this tiny number of dangeorus people...