Here we go again, insanity and guns.

[Bookishleigh]

And you saw how readily I responded, right?

Ishmael

By ignoring them because they are all male (except one which has been accused of being male). No calling them sweet penis I see.

 

[Ishmael]

By ignoring them because they are all male (except one which has been accused of being male). No calling them sweet penis I see.

Because they posted irrelevant bull shit. Just as you did re. mental health funding. The point being that all the funding in the world wouldn't have kept those murder's off the streets, or prevented them from having firearms, baseball bats, knives, or their hands.

You, and I suppose others that I have on ignore, are trying to pick fly shit out of the pepper by chasing the funding, or non-funding as it were, down the mink hole.

The issue isn't whether the mentally ill walk among us, hit the streets 'sweet cheeks', 99% of the homeless are mentally ill. But they pose no immediate threat to the public or themselves. So what do you do? Put them on the public dole as well? Most of them are already eligible, but don't take advantage of it. Because, you see, they don't think they're crazy, they think we are. Get out there and ask them yourself.

As far as using a gender reference in responding to you, did it ever occur to you that you're the first person NOT on ignore that actually addressed my post re. the mentally ill? On your part, what's next? The 'race card?'

Ishmael

 

[hashtag46]

There are two separate issues here, and I wonder if many people (Ish, myself, AJ and so on) aren't in fact on the same page and it's only a matter of miscommunication due to semantics.

1.Long term institutionalisation of the mentally ill.
This one is a very complex issue

2.The length of acute inpatient admissions.
If that's what Ish was referring to I would definitely agree.
Seems odd that someone who most likely displayed signs of a "schizophrenia - type illness (as opposed to just drug use) would be out of hospital and after just a few weeks. Perhaps even for the mere fact that medications take a long time to kick in.

I wonder if Ish is using the word institutionalisation differently than I use it.

 

[Saint Peter]

Ish knows I have the sweetest penis on Lit.

Ish also knows that reagan and his republican puppets cut funding to the Mental Health Systems Act set up by jimmy carter. You are not crazy anymore. You are a free man!

Irony anyone? Reagan was shot by john hinckley, an untreated schizophrenic, shortly after that.

 

[Ishmael]

Ish knows I have the sweetest penis on Lit.

Ish also knows that reagan and his republican puppets cut funding to the Mental Health Systems Act set up by jimmy carter. You are not crazy anymore. You are a free man!

Irony anyone? Reagan was shot by john hinckley, an untreated schizophrenic, shortly after that.

Who controlled congress sparky? Did Reagan veto the budget submitted to him by the democrats?

And exactly what has this to do with the problem in attempting to balance public safety with civil rights?

Ishmael

 

[hashtag46]

There are two separate issues here, and I wonder if many people (Ish, myself, AJ and so on) aren't in fact on the same page and it's only a matter of miscommunication due to semantics.

1.Long term institutionalisation of the mentally ill.
This one is a very complex issue

2.The length of acute inpatient admissions.
If that's what Ish was referring to I would definitely agree.
Seems odd that someone who most likely displayed signs of a "schizophrenia - type illness (as opposed to just drug use) would be out of hospital and after just a few weeks. Perhaps even for the mere fact that medications take a long time to kick in.

I wonder if Ish is using the word institutionalisation differently than I use it.

Because such an incident would have never occurred in Australia.
Someone with a severe mental illness like the guy seems to have had (a schizophrenic type of illness) who displayed so many signs of risk would have been kept in hospital for at least a month, or until fully treated. Plus very closely monitored after discharge.

Unless what happened 2 months ago were thought to be, by his treatment team only due to drug use and unrelated to an underlying illness.

 

[Disgustipated]

Reagan was too busy arming terrorists and drug dealers to be bothered with mental health issues.

 

[hashtag46]

I really hope that Lance might chime in and clarify and explain these issues, at least for myself or folks like me to get a better understanding of things

1.of that piece of legislation in question -the one that Ish keeps mentioning) . (Of which I have a poor understanding, I have to admit).
- Did it target long term institutionalisation of the mentally ill?
Or inpatient admissions which are specifically designed to manage risk?
Or both

2.And where does the error in communication between folks like myself and AJ (not Que) lie, since I have the feeling that we're on a similar page

 

[Ishmael]

I really hope that Lance might chime in and clarify and explain these issues, at least for myself or folks like me to get a better understanding of things

1.of that piece of legislation in question -the one that Ish keeps mentioning) . (Of which I have a poor understanding, I have to admit).
- Did it target long term institutionalisation of the mentally ill?
Or inpatient admissions which are specifically designed to manage risk?
Or both

2.And where does the error in communication between folks like myself and AJ (not Que) lie, since I have the feeling that we're on a similar page

LMAO, asking Lance to 'clarify' something is like asking the evil kid down the block not to stir that bucket of shit.

Further, it is NOT legislation. It is renderings by the Supreme Court. Barring a reversal it IS the law of the land and neither the congress or the president, or anyone else for that matter, has shit to say about it.

Ishmael

 

[hashtag46]

1.LMAO, asking Lance to 'clarify' something is like asking the evil kid down the block not to stir that bucket of shit.

2.Further, it is NOT legislation. It is renderings by the Supreme Court. Barring a reversal it IS the law of the land and neither the congress or the president, or anyone else for that matter, has shit to say about it.

Ishmael

1.Lol I forgot about his hobbies

2.I'm not trying to be antagonistic here.
I'm just hoping for someone who has the patience to spell it it out from A to B to folks like myself. Or at least give us a link to something that explains it more clearly and in practical terms as applied to this particular shooting. Instead of all the abstract, hard to understand lawyer-ish mumbo jumbo that I came across when I googled.

Because even if we might be lacking as far as that aspect is concerned, we're not completely clueless in other areas and we'd like to contribute to the debate too.

 

[Ishmael]

1.Lol I forgot about his hobbies

2.I'm not trying to be antagonistic here.
I'm just hoping for someone who has the patience to spell it it out from A to B to folks like myself. Or at least give us a link to something that explains it more clearly and in practical terms as applied to this particular shooting. Instead of all the abstract, hard to understand lawyer-ish mumbo jumbo that I came across when I googled.

Because even if we might be lacking as far as that aspect is concerned, we're not completely clueless in other areas and we'd like to contribute to the debate too.

Trying to make sense out of nonsense is a prescription for confusion at the least, insanity in the worst instance. It's an exercise in mental masturbation and not prescribed for long term stability. Stop trying to make sense of that which never will.

Ishmael

 

[hashtag46]

Personally, I'm against chronic institutionalisation of those with severe mental illnesses.
But for those who have certain risk factors in their profile, I'm for lowering the thresshold for admissions to the inpatient unit whenever they "flare up" so to speak, and for lengthier periods of inpatient stay until at least their illness is under control.

__________________________

1.So from what I read the guy started saying all sorts of crazy dangerous things 2 months ago.
So they referred him to the mental health team who immediately admitted him for assessment and treatment, as well as to protect the public.
Everything seemed very appropriate until this point.

2.The shocking part was that he was released just after a week, with very poor monitoring by the mental health services and poor liaison between services (see his ability to con the airport employees into believing that he still had a firearms license).

-- Either incompetence of the mental health team who gave him the wrong diagnosis.
They might have put it down solely to drug use or whatever, as opposed to an underlying psychotic illness.
Which excuses a bit the brief admission. Sortof, because a week is inexcusable even in such cases. But even if true, that doesn't excuse the poor monitoring after discharge.

-- Or they might have given him the right diagnosis, but some lawyer managed to get him discharged just after a week before he was adequately treated
I can't conceive this possibility (it would never happen in Australia) so I'm going with the previous possibility.. But if true and such things do happen in the States on a regular basis, then the system is fucked up.

-- Or his shooting was unrelated to a mental illness, and his short fuse was due to other factors drugs or his personality. Not that much that any mental health services can do in this case. It goes under the juridisdiction of other services.
But this is less likely, due to what happened 2 months ago

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

This thread is for US citizens to participate in. Non-citizens don't know the history of this problem so they come up with simplistic, and often stupid, solutions to a problem they don't understand.

Ishmael

Yes. Hash is wrong, it has nothing to do with quality of health care.

That's just an assumption made because our government has not nationalized it.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

"According to law enforcement officials, Santiago was found with an active military ID and is an American citizen, born in New Jersey. Previous known addresses include Penuelas, Puerto Rico and Anchorage, Alaska.

They add that in November 2016, just two months ago, he walked into an FBI office in Anchorage claiming that the government had "forced him to watch ISIS videos" and to fight for ISIS. According to a slightly different narrative presented by CNN, source said that Santiago was hearing voice telling him to join the Islamic State. Ultimately he was sent to a psychiatric hospital."
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...spital-over-isis-ties-was-investigated-child-



Ok. So two months before the attack he made some clearly dangerous statements. Most likely due to mental illness but there's no official comment on that yet.

Regardless of the "diagnosis" or the outcome of that psychiatric admission, I'm sure that the mental health professionals would have asked for -a temporary at least- revoking of his firearm license.

Yet he managed to check in a firearm at the airport.
How was that possible? Don't they check people before allowing them to travel with guns? And how and where did he procure the firearm from?

They did. The also recently, very recently gave them back.

 

[Lancecastor]

Are you guys still on ish's red herring hunt?

Have we established the size of fermis tits yet?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

https://cdn.amp************/ii/w820/s/heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/esteban1.jpeg?quality=65&strip=all&strip=all

He is almost dark skinned enough to make the transition from crazy person to terrorist.

You need a different source...

 

[hashtag46]

Yeah, I realise that I went head in first without reflecting on the issue or reading carefully Ish's comments, but in my defense I saw red when I read Que's comments.
It might be that I'm wrong, but for some reason I perceive him to have a disdainful attitude towards those who suffer from mental illness which irks me, particularly since he used to be or is staff (as he pretty much keeps implying) so there's that power imbalance.
Just for the record I never worked in mental health nor was I ever a mental health patient either lol

So I'm done with the Que bashing and I appologise to the others whose comments I misinterpreted or I offended

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Now you may have your guns back.

​

 

[Adjudicator]

Are you guys still on ish's red herring hunt?

Have we established the size of fermis tits yet?

Hash has asked you to explain this issue so she can understand it.

 

[hashtag46]

Apparently someone isn't getting any attention on the board, so he's reverting to the go-to buffoon (me).

 

[Adjudicator]

Apparently someone isn't getting any attention on the board, so he's reverting to the go-to buffoon (me).

Wrong inference yet again (except for the buffoon part - spot on!)

It is an entertaining occurrence, you reaching out to a predator so frequently and praising him and asking for his help. Your sense of people is horribly inaccurate. It's likely best you continue to be housebound.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

http://cdn0.wideopenspaces.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Swamp-People.jpg

"Chute 'im Liz'beth, CHUTE 'im!

http://swamppeoplenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/liz.jpg

 

[richard_daily]

I didn't take the time to read this thread, is ish finally copping to his mental illness?

 

[hashtag46]

Wrong inference yet again (except for the buffoon part - spot on!)

It is an entertaining occurrence, you reaching out to a predator so frequently and praising him and asking for his help. Your sense of people is horribly inaccurate. It's likely best you continue to be housebound.

As I said before: I used to find you amusing and even fed into this entire nonsense. And I didn't take your insults and mockery to heart either, since this is just make belief and I insulted people plenty too.

But you kept and keep endorsing certain scummy behaviors that distressed me and just the other day you tried to do that again "subtly" in a particular thread.

So please: find another 'buffoon' to toy with. Or if you want to keep going as before, beware that I will be keeping my interactions with you and a couple other forum members to the minimum.

 

[Adjudicator]

As I said before: I used to find you amusing and even fed into this entire nonsense. And I didn't take your insults and mockery to heart either, since this is just make belief and I insulted people plenty too.

But you kept and keep endorsing certain scummy behaviors that distressed me and just the other day you tried to do that again "subtly" in a particular thread.

So please: find another 'buffoon' to toy with. Or if you want to keep going as before, beware that I will be keeping my interactions with you and a couple other forum members to the minimum.

You are threatening me with not interacting with me? Ha! Sure, go for it!