John Hinkley Jr on the loose.

[Rev. Rye]

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

How very humane of you. Punish people forever.

Sure you’re not a Christian?

Boru

 Punishment would be putting them in with violent sane prisoners in a regular prison. Containing the mentally ill that have gotten violent isn't saying they are like the sane. But it also does not mean they are safe in society either. 

Don't confuse punishment with containment. If you want to argue Hinkley and Yates are mentally ill, I am with you. Nobody should argue they deserve the needle or gas chamber or waterboarding. But they are still a danger to society. 

Bundy and Dahmer are/were not mentally ill. Hinkley and Yates should not get out. Not because they knew what they were doing, but because they are a danger to public safety. They should not be punished or abused at all. But that does not make them safe for the public.

(bold mine)

Have you (and I mean YOU, personally) ever been confined for an extended period of time? If you haven't, then kindly belt up about shit you couldn't possibly understand. Saying things like this makes you sound like even more of a facile idiot than I've given you credit for.

The point is, there comes a time when mentally ill people who were once a danger to society are a danger no longer. There's a reason mental illness is called an 'illness'- because it's treatable, you dumb fuck. And YOU, of all people, are not the least bit qualified to say '...they are still a danger to society.'

Boru

[Spongebob]

As a side note, after reading about Hinkley's trial and the aftermath, its kind of astonishing that the federal government and several states reformed laws regarding the insanity defense, some abolishing it altogether. Yet now, with so many mass shootings and so many deaths every year, we have almost no action in government to try and address the issue. I don't understand why the president getting shot is so much more important than random citizens getting shot, including 6 year olds.

[Rev. Rye]

As a side note, after reading about Hinkley's trial and the aftermath, its kind of astonishing that the federal government and several states reformed laws regarding the insanity defense, some abolishing it altogether. Yet now, with so many mass shootings and so many deaths every year, we have almost no action in government to try and address the issue. I don't understand why the president getting shot is so much more important than random citizens getting shot, including 6 year olds.

Because random citizens don’t have power?

[The Architect Of Fate]

What the actual fuck are you blathering about?


Trump is an asshole. I have said this many times.


You are some kind of twisted fuck if you think I defend him.

Considering you constantly regurgitate Trumpist talking points. This is  bull 

---

John Hinkley won his freedom fair and square

[tackattack]

Have you (and I mean YOU, personally) ever been confined for an extended period of time? If you haven't, then kindly belt up about shit you couldn't possibly understand. Saying things like this makes you sound like even more of a facile idiot than I've given you credit for.

The point is, there comes a time when mentally ill people who were once a danger to society are a danger no longer. There's a reason mental illness is called an 'illness'- because it's treatable, you dumb fuck. And YOU, of all people, are not the least bit qualified to say '...they are still a danger to society.'

Boru

There may come a time, before they die, when mentally ill people who were deemed a danger to themselves or others, are no longer a danger. There may also never come that time, or that cure in every case. I wouldn't know when that time would be, as I'm no professional, but it shouldn't be assumed that they're magically no longer a threat, especially if confinement is for the protection of the society. If it's for the punishment of acts, then that's a whole different conversation.

[brewer]

He needs to reproduce before it's to late.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Have you (and I mean YOU, personally) ever been confined for an extended period of time? If you haven't, then kindly belt up about shit you couldn't possibly understand. Saying things like this makes you sound like even more of a facile idiot than I've given you credit for.

The point is, there comes a time when mentally ill people who were once a danger to society are a danger no longer. There's a reason mental illness is called an 'illness'- because it's treatable, you dumb fuck. And YOU, of all people, are not the least bit qualified to say '...they are still a danger to society.'

Boru

There may come a time, before they die, when mentally ill people who were deemed a danger to themselves or others, are no  longer a danger. There may also never come that time, or that cure in every case. I wouldn't know when that time would be, as I'm no professional, but it shouldn't be assumed that they're magically no longer a threat, especially if confinement is for the protection of the society. If it's for the punishment of acts, then that's a whole different conversation.

There may also come a time when non-mentally ill (or undiagnosed mentally ill) people become a danger to society. Should we confine everyone on the off chance?

In Hinckley’s case, he’s been under observation and treatment for more than four decades. He’s had limited, unsupervised release, and hasn’t had any trouble. His own doctors as well as doctors who work for the US government have decided he’s well enough to be released. I don’t think deferring to the experts is a bad idea.

Boru

[tackattack]

I agree, and I wasn't disagreeing earlier boru. I was just saying that we can't assume all dangers to society won't always be that way (whether morally depraved, or mentally ill).

[Spongebob]

As a side note, after reading about Hinkley's trial and the aftermath, its kind of astonishing that the federal government and several states reformed laws regarding the insanity defense, some abolishing it altogether.  Yet now, with so many mass shootings and so many deaths every year, we have almost no action in government to try and address the issue.  I don't understand why the president getting shot is so much more important than random citizens getting shot, including 6 year olds.

Because random citizens don’t have power?

Well, yes.  If it's important to address something when it happens to the president, it should be equally important when the victim is a regular citizen.