Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Avicii

Should a Mentally Disabled Person/Child be Prosecuted to the Fullest Extent of the Law?

18 posts in this topic

Just a little debate i had with a friend the other day and would love to hear your guys' opinions.

Should a Mentally Disabled Person be sentenced to jail for killing a man, or should he simply be put into rehab or a psychiatric firm?

What about a child of 14 years old? Should he be helped in a mental hospital and given a second chance, or be prosecuted and be put in jail if he kills a man?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Jeez, this topic is almost as sensitive as abortion.

I believe a mentally handicapped person should NOT be prosecuted. I understand they are people, just like everyone else, and should be treated as such...but the fact of the matter is, they are not as capable mentally as a "regular person" would be. I have a cousin who is mentally handicapped and I know many of the minor choices in life that he makes aren't always of his own decision, but of the view of his disability.

For example, because he is handicapped he does not understand social limitations. One day while standing in line, at one of the Kamloops Blazers games, someone tried to get by him. This person did not excuse themselves or wait for a gap, the individual pushed my cousin to get him out of the way, and continued to walk. My cousin became agitated and glared at the man. This individual, clearly a hostile person by nature, began to heckle my cousin, calling him a "retard" and "dumbass", which upset my cousin who proceeded to sock him in the face. Immediately after throwing the punch, my cousin began to cry. He knew it was wrong, but he did not have the mental capability to stop himself from doing it. Just one example, and a minor one at that.

Then comes the problem of diagnosing a "mental disability". A man with down syndrome and a man with schizophrenia can not be placed on the same pedestal, because one is far more of a disability than the other.

It's a tough one.

2

Share this post


Link to post

Yup, with the way they are getting more accepted into the public as good and deserve to have the same benefits of " normal" society, they should have the repercussions as well. If they don't have empathy, does that make it alright to murder or hurt someone?

0

Share this post


Link to post

I think you have to look at it on a case by case basis.

3

Share this post


Link to post

Most kids 12 and up already knows what's right and what's wrong. If not, they belong to the "mentally diminished" category.

I believe that those who are mentally ill should be required to take medications. I know it's not PC to say it, since people should have the choice to not take medicine, but seriously, who actually benefits from having mentally unstable people wandering around?

1

Share this post


Link to post

From the point of law, it all depends on mens rea and actus rea.

Mens Rea = intent

Actus Rea = actually doing the crime

^ Both must be found to be prosecuted.

So in the case of a mentally disabled person.. did they MEAN to do it ? Or was it the better half of their disability

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is how it goes. Of course there are other factors too.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I know it's an obvious choice due the the biasm that comes with the answer but..

For those of you who think it's wrong, if a mentally disabled person/child killed your father, would you want him put behind bars?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Yes to the fullest extent!

More extent infact.

0

Share this post


Link to post

100% depends on the circumstances.

If they knew what they were doing, and carried it out then yes.

If their disability prevents them from fully comprehending what they are doing, then no.

As far as kids go, I knew not to kill people when I was 10 years old. The fact a 16 year old can kill someone and get away with it is pretty ridiculous.

0

Share this post


Link to post

From the point of law, it all depends on mens rea and actus rea.

Mens Rea = intent

Actus Rea = actually doing the crime

^ Both must be found to be prosecuted.

So in the case of a mentally disabled person.. did they MEAN to do it ? Or was it the better half of their disability

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is how it goes. Of course there are other factors too.

0

Share this post


Link to post

100% depends on the circumstances.

If they knew what they were doing, and carried it out then yes.

If their disability prevents them from fully comprehending what they are doing, then no.

As far as kids go, I knew not to kill people when I was 10 years old. The fact a 16 year old can kill someone and get away with it is pretty ridiculous.

0

Share this post


Link to post

No u shouldn't ruin there lives like that

0

Share this post


Link to post

No u shouldn't ruin there lives like that

1

Share this post


Link to post

As long as you can prove intent, then yes. If not then criminal prosecution isn't a valid redress of the act. A more medical response such as being committed to an institution may be a more humane and preferable avenue to take.

0

Share this post


Link to post

As long as you can prove intent, then yes. If not then criminal prosecution isn't a valid redress of the act. A more medical response such as being committed to an institution may be a more humane and preferable avenue to take.

0

Share this post


Link to post

If the crime has a clear and definite motive, then yes. No excuses schmexcuses.

0

Share this post


Link to post
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.