Ike wrote:

"jwk" <jwkinraleigh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110511017.990051.90370@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Ike wrote:

"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in

message

news:n1t0311oj62i4j7c5b2a71i9ppvb6hnpbp@4ax.com...

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:01:37 GMT, "Ike"

<accordiondoc@mindspring.com>

drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and

drunkenly

proclaimed the following

It was just a temporary aberration. Too bad the courts don't

understand

mental illness. He should be getting treatment not hard time

if he

didn't

seriously injure anyone.

He set off bombs, held a woman at gunpoint, and threatened to

kill

her.. that's enough to get three life sentences.

But did he actually injure anyone? He was just insane and might

be

cured.

Crap. No one is ever "crured" of this kind of mental illness.

They

are only ever controlled by medication. The taking of which no one
usually bothers to monitor. Guys like this are always stopping

their

treatments, too.

A violent person needs to be controlled. Prison or instution. Is

a

permanet place in a mental instution any better than a prison?

Maybe.

The guy shouldn't be allowed to run around loose in any event.

jwk

They are not cured by medical science, but over time in a different
environment, perhaps they will get over it. If not, then keep them
incarcerated. In some ways that guy was a creative artist. That could

be the

bridge between sanity and insanity. Yes, many of those people can't

be

cured, particularly the ones who have tasted the power of killing.

Unlike many folks, I have no interest in punishing people because they
are immoral. I do believe we have an obligation to protect ourselves
from folks who are dangerous. The psych ward where I worked as a nurse
was filled with people who stopped taking their medications. They are
not the most rational and self-controlled folks around, even if the
meds are completely successful (as temporary treatment). They just
haven't had enough *practice being sane and centered. They feel OK, so
why take medicine? (People given antibiotics prescriptions often do
this.) Or they get busy with life, and once they go a day or two
without, their judgement starts to go, and...

Sure, someday when our medicine improves they will be curable, or our
monitoring will be much better. But until then, some folks have proven
themselves to be dangerous and will remain so (at least potentially).

Compare this to a sane person who was drugged without his knowledge
(rare, but it's happened). This hypothetical person was not in his
right mind when he committed his hypothetical crime, but there is no
reason to fear a repeat.

Kermit

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:02:17 GMT, "Ike" <accordiondoc@mindspring.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following

The court found that at the time of his crimes he was sane, and
capable of forming opinions on right and wrong.

the court found... so that makes it correct?

OK, basic legal instruction.

In these United States, in order to be found not guilty by reason of
insanity or mental defect, the defense has to show that at the time of
the crime the defendant was not capable of understanding the impact of
his actions, or was unable to understand that they were wrong.

A good example is someone who catches a rapist in the act, and kills
him. He could argue that he was so overwhelmed that he wasn;t in his
right mind.

The Rainbow Man was interviewed by mental health professionals who
found him sane. His actions at the hotel were not that of a delusional
person, but someone who was in control and had a plan.

He should rot in jail.