I love that the main criticism is that this will cause the ultra wealthy to leave the state. That just seems like a reason to implement this nationwide rather than at the state level.
I mean, an eroding tax base is a problem. I just think the solution is to drag them kicking and screaming to pay back into the system that enabled them to become so stinking rich rather than chasing them off/eating them. The Guillotine of the first French Republic sure did feel good until the reign of terror rolled in.
Wow, yeah, that was a bad read lol. It’s generally received wisdom for global economics that tax disincentives push people to a point, but most of 'em will actually pay taxes if the alternative is hanging out in Bermuda forever. Nationwide rather than statewide is gonna be good enough for most
Even if it’s not implemented nation wide, there’s the implication that the state is losing something by these people leaving. I suspect they’re contributing little by being there though.
I mean, if they leave, that tax revenue drops, meaning the goodies you gained may have to be dropped. The concern is whether it is sustainable long term
What tax revenue drops? Before the change they weren’t paying the additional tax, and now they aren’t paying it if they leave, so nothing is lost on that account. The state loses whatever taxes they were paying originally; given that they’re annoyed enough to leave over an increase that suggests that they were already finding ways to minimize their tax payments. Thus, by them leaving, the state is likely losing a small amount of revenue. Given that each person has a cost to the state, the net effect will be even smaller.
Surely there’s a point at which taxes drive away enough people that it doesn’t work, but it’s clearly not the case for this particular implementation.
One of the plaintiffs in the suit, Samantha Casiano, vomited on the stand while discussing her baby’s fatal birth defect, which she said also put her life at risk.
Casiano said she learned at 20 weeks’ gestation that her baby had anencephaly, a serious condition that meant the infant was missing parts of her brain and skull. Casiano said her obstetrician told her the baby would not survive after birth and gave her information about funeral homes.
Casiano read aloud a doctor’s note that diagnosed her pregnancy as high risk, then began to sob and ultimately threw up, prompting the judge to call a recess.
Is it price gouging if there is a heat advisory is my question, and how enforceable is that. For water it’s just cruel, especially in places with little access to drinkable tap water.
The fucked up thing is that it’ll have to get legislated. Like there will be a bill that says you can’t price gouge on water in a heat advisory.
And the more fucked up thing is that it’ll be controversial.
And then you realize that this is why we can’t have nice things. We can’t all just play nice together on our own, no, as much as we all claim to hate daddy government, we need him to come down and remind us that shit like this is anti-human and start defining rules that really should have just been common decency in the first place.
Like how I feel when I tell my younger kid to stop throwing forks in the house. I shouldn’t have to tell you that. I told you yesterday, and the day before. And I told you three times today to stop throwing things. And then I get forked in the arse.
right, but some people do, and by encouraging this, you’re fucking over your fellow humans.
edit: There are also situations where you don’t have a choice but to buy water bottles. maybe you’re out of your home, your personal bottle is empty, and it’s hot out. maybe you’re at the airport. sure you could drink from water fountains, but what if they’re nowhere near you? or what if they don’t work?
I supposed it depends on the country, but as far as I know in most of Europe you can just enter a coffee shop or the local equivalent and ask for a glass of tap water.
Mind you, even though I bought a metal water bottle years ago and almost never buy bottled water nowadays, as you say sometimes it happens that one needs, though its rare and it’s highly unlikely I would be going to a supermarket to buy water.
In looking to credit this, I can’t find anything, but apparently Franklin said “we must all hang together or we will hang separately”, which is 100% the same vibe.
…If the government is going to permit one ideology to put up religious iconography on their grounds, then they must include the other religions stop and take those down.
At the moment, SCOTUS treats no belief as a separate religion. In our life times we are going to have to aim for the more achievable “all religions matter”.
…If the government is going to permit one ideology to put up religious iconography on their grounds, then they must…
…stop and take those down.
Out of curiosity, does the earlier post’s strikethrough for the part I’ve now removed show up for you? I’ve heard that some apps don’t handle all of the formatting options particularly well.
What is the formatting used to denote strikethrough on lemmy? On Kbin it looks like it's ignoring it, but it has double tilde as a supported strikethrough formatter.
So, looks fine to me formatting-wise. I read the intent to be that (1) they’re quoting you, and (2) they’re conveying a government building should not be a place for religious iconography, at all.
I’d be happier if there would be no religious presence in government buildings too, but alas, the SC has ruled for what we’ve got. So I suppose it’s nice at least that we’ve got TST to help ensure our governments aren’t playing favorites
FWIW, I’m reading this thread in a Firefox browser on a PC and only the bolding works for me. I see the double-tildes at either end of what should be struck out text.
I’d put it on par with trespassing into a church and breaking the crosses. It’s destruction of other people’s shit because of the religion it represents but with no additional implications
Edit: Harris has racked up some serious fucking wins. I hope she can keep this up. That they are debating on her terms after trump pulled his bullshit is utterly humiliating. She fucking owned him.
“I think it’s very important to have debates, and we’ve agreed with Fox on a date of September 4. We’ve agreed with NBC. Fairly full agreement subject to them on September 10. And we’ve agreed with ABC on September 25,” the former president said.
...
An ABC source was confident that the network’s debate would be the first one between Trump and the vice president, as the Harris campaign has indicated she will not agree to the Fox News debate.
A source familiar with the NBC negotiations said September 25 was “one of the dates” given to the campaigns. While the network has been in discussions with both camps, the Harris campaign has not formally accepted.
The use of both “we’ve agreed” in the first sentence, and “subject to them” in the third makes me believe he means we == Trump campain and them == Harris campaign. So lying liar though he is, I don’t read that as him claiming Harris agreed to a Fox debate.
It’s so hilariously obvious what he’s doing, too! “We also want a debate on Fox on the 4th.”
So you can get her on your turf, have Fox attack her, and then claim because of some bullshit reason that her behavior on the 4th means you won’t do the one on the 10th? Fuck that. No more playing children’s games.
He’s trying to make it sound like all 3 dates are agreed by both sides, but Harris hasn’t agreed to fox. When she doesn’t show he can decline sept 10th.
1973: The Nixon Administration sued Trump for refusing to rent to black people
1980s: Trump’s casinos were accused of hiding black staff when Trump visited
1989: Trump took out a full page ad arguing for the death penalty for a group of black men (The ‘Central Park Five’), effectively putting a bounty on their heads and plaguing them with a lifetime of death threats. He was sued by the Justice Department for discrimination.
1991: “Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kinds of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day…I think that the [black] guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is.
1992: Trump’s casino was fined $200,000 for transferring black dealers off certain tables to appease racist patrons.
1993: Trump said Native American casinos shouldn’t be allowed because, “They don’t look like Indians to me.”
2000: Trump ran a series of attack ads against Native American casinos, alleging (with no proof) that they were guilty of crimes.
2004: Trump fired a black contestant from ‘The Apprentice” for being over-educated.
2010: Trump argued in favor of segregating Muslims in Lower Manhattan.
2011: Birtherism. Trump alleged that Obama was Kenyan based on nothing but skin color. He’s neither apologized, nor renounced that claim.
2015 (1): Trump called Mexican immigrants “rapists” who are “bringing crime and drugs” to the US.
2015 (2): Trump called for “a ban on all Muslims entering the US.”
2016(1): Trump called for a Mexican judge to recuse himself based on nothing other than his race. Paul Ryan said, “This was the textbook definition of a racist comment.”
2016 (2): Trump regularly retweeted material from white supremacists and neo-Nazis during his campaign.
2016(3): Trump tweeted a picture alleging Hillary was Jewish or controlled by Jewish people.
2016(4): The Trump campaign adopted Nixon’s “Law and Order” rhetoric which was based in racial fear mongering.
2016(5): Trump told black voters, “What do you have to lose?”
2017(1): Trump asked a black reporter to set up a meeting with the black caucus simply because she was black.
2017(2): “…some very fine people on both sides”, said Trump of a violent Nazi rally.
Like the recent claim from a producer that he used the N-word on The Apprentice.
• Racist comments: Pruitt says that there is a tape of Trump using the n-word to describe Jackson, a Black Goldman Sachs banker, as the judges are discussing who should win the first season of The Apprentice.
According to Pruitt, Carolyn Kepcher, one of Trump’s employees who advised him on the show, argued that Jackson did a strong job with the season’s final challenge, and he deserved to win.
“Yeah,” Trump allegedly said, “but, I mean, would America buy a n— winning?”
Pruitt says that Kepcher’s face reddened, but producers and those in the room simply glossed over the comment and continued with the taping. He adds that such statements were cut from the show and that he does not believe those tapes will ever come to light.
All of this should be copypasta-ed, memed, tooted, whispered, screamed, broadcast, magnified, disseminated, propogated, and maybe spread around a touch…
Btw random fact: it turned out that the reason his Long-Form birth certificate was looking photoshopped was printer error.
I saw that in a really awesome talk of a big data scientist who found the printer issue and gave a talk about his story and the journey to get it fixed. His name is David Kriesel if you wanna look him up, but the talk’s in German.
It annoys me to no end that real-life whistleblowers end up in jail, have to emmigrate or die under mysterious circumstances, but fictional whistleblowers are cheered on in theatres and novels.
It’s like America has a severe case of cognitive dissonance that the world sees, but is happy to stay that way no matter the cost.
The middle class is a made up idea to convince part of the working class that they are immune to the problems of the rest of the working class because they’re in a marginally better financial position.
You almost got it. The Totally Fucked class is there to remind the Not Rich class that it could be worse, and that if they rock the boat, they can easily be relegated to the Totally Fucked class if they miss a paycheck or two.
Fictional whistleblowers are cheered on because the public likes whistleblowers and the people making the fiction know that but real whistleblowers are persecuted because the people in power do not represent the public
As has been said here before, not many cheered for Chelsea, Snowden, Reality or even Assange.
We can’t keep blaming the elite who rule us if we’re not willing to put boots on the ground and shut the nation down until politicians do the right thing.
And it’s not impossible … just look at France to see how it should be done.
There’s a severe lack of political will in the US that I attribute to both isolation and electoralism. Many if not most Americans believe the extent of their political actions should be voting for a president every 4 years and any political organization or movement outside of this typically gets co-opted or rebranded into something useless. America is very good at handling it’s citizens and very good at squashing radical political movements.
Most people simply don’t care because they don’t truly believe there is anything they can actually do about it. Better to just not worry about it.
If anything, the jester solidifies the king’s power by working for the king as a sort of pressure valve. The king wants some of the discontent of the people to be expressed openly, releasing built-up tension and ensuring that said discontent will not burst in actions that could really undermine his position. The jester is his means of doing that.
When we, the public, laugh at the king, our laughter is also an expression of his power. He wants us to laugh so as not to act. It is, then, his laughter grafted onto our faces. When we laugh at the king, it is actually the king laughing at us.
Real life whistleblowers don’t have a full team of Hollywood PR professionals boosting their image.
The closest we came to a real whistleblower celebrity was Edward Snowden. And when he left Hong Kong for Russia, all the liberals who thought he was a based freedom fighting chad decided oops nah, Big Russia Foreign Agent disregard everything about that PRISM shit.
As someone else noted, Bieber was young and naive. I don’t think he said it to boost his ego; rather, it was just a poor choice of words. Now, Musk, on the other hand…
Consumers will choose to buy products from companies who don't spill molten sulfur so the invisible hand of the market will fix this situation any moment now.
A few years ago, a CSX train carrying acrylonitrile had an axle snap and derailed in my town, igniting in the process, and creating a huge plume of cyanide gas. It was a damned miracle nobody was killed.
The response from CSX was impressive. I have no complaints about how they handled it AFTER it happened. However, and it only recently occurred to me, but that response that was so well oiled, rehearsed, and organized… they’ve CLEARLY had WAY too much experience doing this; way too many times they’ve had to sweep into a town and “handle” things after a derailment of a hazmat train.
Maybe… just maybe they should consider putting a little more emphasis on upgrading and maintaining their equipment. Maybe they wouldn’t have to have so many teams ready to sweep in and manage the medium-sized ecological catastrophes that happen so often.
Bradley Haynes and his colleagues were the last chance Union Pacific had to stop an unsafe train from leaving one of its railyards. Skilled in spotting hidden dangers, the inspectors in Kansas City, Missouri, wrote up so-called “bad orders” to pull defective cars out of assembled trains and send them for repairs.
But on Sept. 18, 2019, the area’s director of maintenance, Andrew Letcher, scolded them for hampering the yard’s ability to move trains on time.
“We’re a transportation company, right? We get paid to move freight. We don’t get paid to work on cars,” he said. “The first thing that I’m getting questioned about right now, every day, is why we’re over 200 bad orders and what we’re doing to get them down. … If I was an inspector on a train,” he continued, “I would probably let some of that nitpicky shit go.”
I feel like there’s a lot of steps between rehabilitating a chronic shoplifter and a guy who killed and consumed a guy’s brain. Even if someone is rehabilitated should they escape punishment? Should we not punish people for what they do to others?
Sometimes the lessons that stay with you longest are learned through pain. Sometimes you need to feel hurt to understand it.
If the guy was truly determined by actual professionals (aka: not you) to be fit to return to society, then what’s the issue?
What gain does anyone get from unnecessarily punishing him longer? It’s just a waste of time and resources to inflict pain on an individual because people can’t accept that someone can change.
Punishment does very little in the way of teaching a lesson. Do some actual research.
Edit: furthermore, this was an incident of mental illness and a severe psychological break. You can’t punish that out of someone. That makes no sense. This man needed serious help, got it, and has been compliant with his treatment.
While I trust professionals in many things, I’m not sure how much experience they have dealing with cannibals who harbor murderous intent. Can you honestly say to me that what little money and resources it takes to keep this single man locked up is worth the possibility of him doing it a second time? What’s a second life worth? Ten years?
I think people like you are a hair from being as insane as the people they lock up. Not all crimes should be forgiven and cold blooded murder is at the top of that list. Sure, he should be allowed to earn more freedoms but released back into society?
I’m not sure how much experience they have dealing with cannibals who harbor murderous intent.
So, that’s the exact kind of shit they go to school for. And beyond that, we should probably be happy that not many have hands on experience with murderous cannibals. I think we can count that as an indicator of a capable society.
An indicator of a capable society would be permanently excluding the people who do such horrid things that it’s considered a niche. Another indicator would be not allowing such truly revolting people the ability to circumvent the minimum 20 years for premeditated murder plus whatever fucking cannibalism adds onto it by pleading insanity and having a board of professionals give a thumbs up.
He robbed someone of their life. Of their future. Not by accident or negligence but intentionally and planned. But hey, I hope someone defends the guy that scoops your brain out of your skull, eats it like a steak dinner, then goes free in a couple years because hey, he’s all better now :) Utterly absurd.
There’s a wide gulf of distance between someone with antisocial personality disorder or psychopathy who fully intends to murder another person and someone experiencing profound psychosis to the point that they don’t even know that their own actions are real. This guy was found not guilty by reason of insanity in the first place because he’s the latter and not the former. The latter can be safe in public, if adherent to medication regimens, therapy, and monitoring. The former must be housed away from the public for life.
I say that as a healthcare professional with experience with both people who have severe psychiatric disorders and also people who are in prison. The original court found this man actually did not have murderous intent and that makes all the difference.
I think people like you are a hair from being as insane as the people they lock up.
Since I fully agree with what the commenter you’re replying to said, I’ll assume you’re lumping me into that group too.
Sure, call me insane. Call me crazy. Call me fucking nuts and say I need a straight jacket. Whatever floats your boat.
You’re not one of the people that can lock me up though and it’s pretty clear why. So just remember that “crazy” motherfuckers like me are driving next to you on the freeway, shopping behind you in the grocery store, living down the hall, etc. We could lose it at any point!
Fear of what you don’t understand and ignoring expert opinions are destroying society. Which side of that would you like to be on?
Plus, you’re talking to another human being, it’s just fucking disrespectful.
Your comment was good and all but really I just want to tell you I love your profile picture. Don’t see enough ODST love out there. The Superintendent was such a great idea
He wasn't punished. He was "found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity" and placed in a state psychiatric hospital. That's not punishment, that is treatment and care. That's also why he is being released - they have determined that he is stable enough to be back in society. (I have my doubts that he will remain stable without being in a psychiatric hospital but I guess we'll all see.)
“What gain does someone get from unnecessarily punishing him longer?” Safety. If you have someone who commits a premeditated murder (insane or not). Then granting them the opportunity to do it again is a serious risk.
Additionally, schizophrenia doesn’t just completely go away. Most cases are episodic, the fact that he is fine now does not mean he’s “cured”. You at the very minimum need to be able to force continuous treatment until his death.
The fact that punishing people serves little utility, doesn’t mean that you should release murderers. The fact that protecting society by imprisoning people, “punishes” the people does not mean that you shouldn’t protect society by imprisoning people.
Ten years is the price of someone else’s entire life? There should be no system in which robbing someone of their future so deliberately should be washed away.
He wanted to eat someone. You don’t have to murder to get access to a corpse. Cold blooded murder should not be seen as ‘correctable’. A man lost his entire life. He loses only ten years. Fuck that.
Murder is 20 to life. How did he get half the minimum sentencing? Ah, plead insanity and then wiggled around the system by getting a clean bill of health so long as he stays on his meds.
What happens if he misses a dose? Hell I missed mine today because I got busy. My blood pressure is a little high but he might decide to kill and eat someone.
Man murdered another man, consumed his brain, and got out in half the minimum sentencing time. There is no further context or situation that remedies this, despite how desperate you are to do so.
I’m ready to reform criminals and the insane for anything but murder or especially violent crimes. Nobody’s life should be gambled on whether or not we have a perfect understanding of mental health. I get that you disagree but I can’t comprehend how. I wouldn’t want this guy in my city let alone my state.
I’m still in disbelief that people are comfortable letting a literal axe murdering cannibal back into society because a small group of people think he’s all better now. I really don’t give a shit if he’s all better now. The amount of people who do this are small enough they shouldn’t get a second chance with society.
So either he’s able to leave the group home freely which defeats what you just said entirely or he doesn’t get to leave and it’s just prison with extra steps. I don’t get your point.
Cool - he shouldn’t be welcomed back into society if those issues are to fucking murder and eat someone. I don’t give a shit how enlightened you think you are, someone should not suffer because you have a boner for “giving everyone a chance at recovery :)” The group of people insane or malicious enough to premeditate their kills is small enough I’m comfortable putting them in a box until they die so nobody else has to be murdered with a fucking axe and eaten you absolute loon.
It's not about pain, at least not for me. If he was in the most comfortable psych hospital in the world, where they fluffed his pillows and shined his shoes, if he ate better and slept better than I do, that would be fine. But releasing him?
I hope that's true, but I've known group homes that are... somewhat lax. The state of mental health care (and funding) in this country does not inspire hope regarding his monitoring.
I suppose we just have to hope that he's not lying about not having urges. As someone with mental illness, I've lied my socks off to avoid the psych ward before.
At least in my state, mental health group homes vary widely by supervision level. Some allow you to come and go like it’s a private home, others are under lock and key.
The problem is we don’t care enough to have psych facilities like that. Which is why we have an entire wing of the emergency department at my hospital dedicated to holding people who are doing nothing but waiting for a bed at one of the trash facilities we actually do bother to provide. No real treatment in the emergency department except meds, but also not safe enough to send them home. Scary that there’s somebody now who needs the bed in that facility more than this guy does.
I’ll say I’m proud of this country the day we provide good, comfortable lifelong treatment facilities for people like this, alongside quality rest homes for our elderly. We have the resources to do it, and the fact that we don’t is an absolute indictment of our society.
We did have psych facilities for a long time, but a lot of abuse was discovered, and our fix for it was to close all those facilities down and release everyone, who mostly just became homeless.
it’s a complicated issue, and we need to get society on board with the idea of treating mental health (to both a sufficient and humane degree) in addition to physical health. moving away from the institutionalization model was intended to ensure people weren’t just locked away to rot at the state hospital under the “supervision” of indifferent or hostile caretakers.
without community support and with the move toward profit-driven healthcare, people aren’t going to get what they need. now our institutions are just literal prisons instead of asylums.
but anyway, i know you know most of this already (the shortcomings of the profit-driven model), as someone working in healthcare.
Agree completely. I can understand manslaughter, I can understand accidents or murder without malice but someone who sits down and decides to kill should never be given the chance to do it twice.
You cannot fix death. It cannot be corrected. They have forefit their future when they stole another’s.
So if your brakes stop working and you run someone over tomorrow, you should be removed from society forever?
Accidentally spread COVID to your grandma and she died? Life in prison for you!
Had a stillbirth? Goodbye society, put the wench behind bars.
Obviously that’s the dumbest take I’ve ever heard. How do people have so little empathy they can’t even imagine what a mental issue like that could even be like. These people are sick and not in control.
If we have highly educated people who can accurately take measures to cure these people, I’m 100% supporting this. More yet, if the US cared only a tiny bit more about healthcare, cases like this would easily be avoided.
People who voted for those not giving a fuck killed the man, maybe you, the voter should be jailed too, according to your rethoric?
I’ve said it 3 times in other threads on this same post but I’ll make it four since apparently I didn’t say it on this one. Manslaughter isn’t the same. I’m talking about premeditated, malicious intent to rob someone from their family and loved ones. Those people are beyond redemption. Beyond correction. They should not get a second chance.
Yes, so the cannibal does not belong in prison as you say. There was no premeditated, malicious intent. How could there be, if you’re not in the right mind.
That’s unusual. So because they didn’t choose the mental illness, they’re absolved of the effects it has? So really the only thing drunk drivers are at fault for is the first drink. After that, they can’t be held responsible. “Not in the right mind” as you say.
You’re right that the drunk driver is only responsible for the first drink. The first drink is what caused the accident in the first place. What happened to manslaughter isn’t murder anyways? That drunk driver very much chose to drink that night and didn’t take measure to stop themselves from doing something dangerous, which justifies a manslaughter charge, like getting a ride to the bar.
That’s very different from someone being mentally ill and absolutely unable to control when those voices start screaming in their head to kill someone.
But hey that first drink isn’t illegal, it’s everything they did after they’re ‘mentally impaired’ so they shouldn’t be held responsible for the second drink or getting behind the wheel. It wasn’t their choice, right? This line of logic is deeply flawed. If we expect people who are drunk to take measures not to harm others in spite of their mental impairment, we should expect the same for the mentally ill.
By nature of successfully being considered legally insane (which is not easy to do), he doesn’t have malicious intent, though. Not in the eyes of the law. By being not in the right mind, it’s as if it wasn’t actually him that committed the crime.
We should be making decisions based on facts, not emotions. It’s easy for a horrible crime to make us feel “what the fuck, he should rot in prison”. But ask yourself why the insanity defense even exists if not to allow seriously ill people to be helped.
Naw this dude is damaged goods. What happens when they cut his meds or if he stops taking it? Other peoples brains gonna be looking very tasty in that group home.
No, this a death penalty thing and that’s a mercy. You kill a guy and eat his brains there’s no coming back, just kill the bastard cheaply and use the resources to rehabilitate someone that can readjust like a drug user.
Planets fucking full anyways to keep a cannibal alive tbh. Make room for good people.
One thing about humans is we are very good at making more.
By that logic, let the man keep eating brains. Let the man eat YOUR brain. You’re clearly not using it, and we can always just make another person to replace you, right?
Fine! But I get to try to kill him first. If he can beat me he can have my stupid fucking brain. Being alive sucks anyways. You’re doing me a favor. One less wage slave for the corporations OH NO!!!
A problem easily avoided by using more space efficient modes of transportation, and also not particularly relevant to my objection that overpopulation is a Malthusian myth.
Which will never happen because you’d have to rip up cities and replan them.
But whatever I’m sure your gonna say it’s a “matter of resource distribution” not a space problem but I’ll just say this, we will never solve the distro problem because of greed.
Plus every new person born is gonna generate a shit ton of carbon. They’re gonna need a place to live. That’s space that used to be an ecosystem.
So idk maybe you want the planet to be turned into Courascant (one big planet sized city). Sure there’s space for trillions of humans if we stack em up high! Good luck feeding them.
In this issue I refuse to be liberal. If your mental illness causes you to kill and eat people, you don’t get to rejoin society. If I was the mentally ill cannibal, I would never want to be out. Same thing happened up here in Canada, we have cannibals and terrorists running around free cause they’re “rehabilitated” and the rest of us? Fuck us and our safety
They wouldn’t tell us if he did. All this situation has taught me is that if I wanna murder someone, eat part of them. I’ll get away with it with a slap on the wrist and some pills
Nothing can really be done for them. Locking him up won’t do anything for them, either. One could argue for some form of restitution, but then you’d have to ask if they even want anything from the guy.
The real solutions are adequate mental healthcare and access to medication, as well as routine monitoring and check-ins. All following an extensive inpatient treatment and rehabilitation program… So, basically what they’ve done here. Fighting pain with more pain doesn’t do anyone good. It’s entirely reactionary. Locking someone up for life does not help anyone.
Helping the person get the treatment they so desperately need does.
Locking someone up doesn’t do anything for the victims or their families…
Also, just take a look at wrongful conviction rates - and that’s just the confirmed ones… How many do we miss?
Are we really willing to let so many innocent people be locked away or even killed? Debts can be repaid for a wrongful conviction, but a prison sentence cannot, and a death sentence- well, duh.
Again, like I’ve said - and I feel like a broken record with this - prison does not help anyone. If anything, it makes things worse. I mean, you’re really gonna try to tell me that locking a bunch of convicts together for years or decades at a time and then just dropping them back into society once they’re done is a good idea??? No.
Help. Support. Therapy. Proper monitoring and, if necessary, medication. THAT helps. Don’t look at the “what”, look at the “why”.
We need to STOP the cycle of institutionalization, and START reforming people into productive members of society.
Also, it’s way fuckin cheaper on the taxpayers, if that’s what you care about
I only care for the victims and I still didn’t get an answer. “Restitution”, what does that entail in detail? What’s your concrete plan of action to help the victims of violent crimes? How do you stop them from getting revenge? How do you handle them if they do take revenge? What happens with criminals who are repeat offenders? What about those were people know they plan an attack on someone?
People like you pretend to care for people but I never get an answer to these questions. Victims are blissfully ignored in your crusade to help and protect violent criminals. It’s just an interesting observation you can make all the time.
What kind of recommendation do you suggest if someone eats your husbands brain for example, or rapes you? What if someone wants, as decompensation, that the other person suffers as much as they did? What if they want a sum of money the person can not pay? What if they want the person to go to prison for life?
Evidently you don’t understand the prevalence and severity of mental health issues, cause this could happen anywhere…
Unfortunately our healthcare system is so fucked up, and society is full of people like you that would rather hurt people than help them, that this sort of thing is only exacerbated.
Stop being part of the problem. Be part of the solution.
Serious mental health treatment, rehabilitation, and medication. Extensive monitoring by mental health professionals, routine check-ins… Basically what they’ve done.
I’m not saying just release the dude, wash their hands of him, and say “good luck”…
The problem is our justice system only focuses on the punishment part. Rehabilitation is either non-existent for most inmates or completely inadequate. The likelihood of this man being mentally stable enough to be safely reintegrated into public life is extremely small.
So the fault lies with the inadequacy of the justice and healthcare system. But my point still stands - simply locking someone away does nothing to actually help.
maybe not… a high profile case like this may well have attracted the attention of more competent psychiatrists, or motivated his care team/state to seek it out. it also seems possible to me that his psychosis was very treatable with the right meds, but that he had not been able to access that care previously.
so yeah. mental health care is health care, and in this case it’s important not only to the well-being of Mr. Smith but to his community as well. i agree with you that, for the american “justice” system, most cases are treated as it punishment is the correct response.
The US justice system unfortunately runs on emotion and punishment rather than rehabilitation, thanks in no small part to the whole privatized prison system. The average American would rather see someone suffer than get the help they need. This is a particularly strong mindset ironically among the conservative religious, but there are plenty of liberals who think that way too. This country needs reform on so many systems…
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.