bellisarius
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2017
- Posts
- 16,761
In almost all of the mass shootings over the years there is one common thread, in virtually all of the cases the shooter was insane. You can call it mentally ill if you want, but from my perspective any one that randomly kills one or more individuals is insane.
The insane should not be allowed to have firearms. You, I, even the NRA agree's on that point. But the problem is that starting in the 70's the ACLU brought a series of actions before the SCOTUS that virtually emptied our mental health institutions. Those actions were warranted when you dive into them. More than a few individuals were committed to mental institutions that just didn't belong there. Some were committed by their families so that the families could get control of their property or money. Others because the family just didn't want to be bothered. and yet others because they marched to the beat of a different drum. Regardless the court rulings were such that it became virtually impossible to commit anyone and deprive them of their constitutional rights.
You see a great many of them on the street, we call them "homeless." While they're an annoyance, they aren't necessarily violent. But they need help and they most often as not will not seek that help on their own. Court intervention is required. They do become a problem when their numbers exceed a certain proportion of the population, like in San Francisco.
Still yet, they aren't the problem. The homeless generally don't have firearms. Simple economics tends to dictate that. The problem is those that are notionally functional. Or those that the family shelters out of love, denial, or both. I suspect that even fear plays a roll in this. They are the ones that end up committing these atrocities.
I believe that the schools play a roll in this as well. The "zero tolerance" policies are a bad idea. As is the wholesale drugging of our youth, mostly young men. No, I don't believe that these are the sole reason, but they are contributory in there own way. Not allowing a creature, any creature, to behave according to it's nature produces warped behavior. The Social Sciences are finally snapping to this, belatedly, but snapping all the same.
Back to the issue, the criminally insane. There has to be some middle ground with regard to the legal remedies to identify and place in remediation, those individuals identified as a potential threat to society. And a means of identifying those that are potential threats. Obviously the problem with the latter is that the Social Sciences are not true sciences at all. They are imperfect with a great many of the findings being subjective.
It's a big problem with the rights guaranteed by the constitution in apparent contradiction with one another. I want those individuals removed from society for treatment as badly as anyone else. At the same time I have no intention of relinquishing my right to "bear arms.'
As much as some of you may want it so, guns are not going to go away. So if that is your position we have no common point to begin a discussion. For those of you that are as interested in a solution as I am..............let's talk.
The insane should not be allowed to have firearms. You, I, even the NRA agree's on that point. But the problem is that starting in the 70's the ACLU brought a series of actions before the SCOTUS that virtually emptied our mental health institutions. Those actions were warranted when you dive into them. More than a few individuals were committed to mental institutions that just didn't belong there. Some were committed by their families so that the families could get control of their property or money. Others because the family just didn't want to be bothered. and yet others because they marched to the beat of a different drum. Regardless the court rulings were such that it became virtually impossible to commit anyone and deprive them of their constitutional rights.
You see a great many of them on the street, we call them "homeless." While they're an annoyance, they aren't necessarily violent. But they need help and they most often as not will not seek that help on their own. Court intervention is required. They do become a problem when their numbers exceed a certain proportion of the population, like in San Francisco.
Still yet, they aren't the problem. The homeless generally don't have firearms. Simple economics tends to dictate that. The problem is those that are notionally functional. Or those that the family shelters out of love, denial, or both. I suspect that even fear plays a roll in this. They are the ones that end up committing these atrocities.
I believe that the schools play a roll in this as well. The "zero tolerance" policies are a bad idea. As is the wholesale drugging of our youth, mostly young men. No, I don't believe that these are the sole reason, but they are contributory in there own way. Not allowing a creature, any creature, to behave according to it's nature produces warped behavior. The Social Sciences are finally snapping to this, belatedly, but snapping all the same.
Back to the issue, the criminally insane. There has to be some middle ground with regard to the legal remedies to identify and place in remediation, those individuals identified as a potential threat to society. And a means of identifying those that are potential threats. Obviously the problem with the latter is that the Social Sciences are not true sciences at all. They are imperfect with a great many of the findings being subjective.
It's a big problem with the rights guaranteed by the constitution in apparent contradiction with one another. I want those individuals removed from society for treatment as badly as anyone else. At the same time I have no intention of relinquishing my right to "bear arms.'
As much as some of you may want it so, guns are not going to go away. So if that is your position we have no common point to begin a discussion. For those of you that are as interested in a solution as I am..............let's talk.
