GoCanucks16 Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 8 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: It wasn't a place for people with sense. We need mental health support more than ever these days. If they are a threat to themselves and/or the community, we can't have them living on the streets. Locking people in institutions does not constitute support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 (edited) 1 minute ago, GoCanucks16 said: Locking people in institutions does not constitute support. If they are a threat to themselves or others would you rather have the mentally ill in prison? Edited March 28, 2021 by bishopshodan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCanucks16 Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 Just now, bishopshodan said: If they are a threat to themselves of others would you rather have the mentally ill in prison? If someone is a threat to themself, that's their business. If someone has harmed others, they can go through the court systems. If it's simply a doctor's opinion that an individual is at risk of harming themself/others, who cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 1 minute ago, GoCanucks16 said: If someone is a threat to themself, that's their business. If someone has harmed others, they can go through the court systems. If it's simply a doctor's opinion that an individual is at risk of harming themself/others, who cares? What about potential threat to themselves or others? as i asked. Just wait for them to do something and let the courts decide? My bro is Bi-polar. Currently in a manic spiral. The 2 times he tried to kill himself, he later admitted he wasn't himself. He was happy it wasn't his business, as he still lives. He's big and tough and hates meds so we keep doing the same game. So, I care about a Dr's opinion. By bro doesn't trust them but I think they are experts, you know due to the training and expertise. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCanucks16 Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: What about potential threat to themselves or others? as i asked. Just wait for them to do something and let the courts decide? My bro is Bi-polar. Currently in a manic spiral. The 2 times he tried to kill himself, he later admitted he wasn't himself. He was happy it wasn't his business, as he still lives. He's big and tough and hates meds so we keep doing the same game. So, I care about a Dr's opinion. By bro doesn't trust them but I think they are experts, you know due to the training and expertise. As I said more succinctly before: potential threats do not matter until actualized, unless the basis for that threat is an utterance or act of intimidation from the person we're supposing is a threat, in which case it is quickly a legal issue and not a medical one. A doctor's opinion should be considered worthless when the alternative is to allow that opinion to govern lives and revoke/infringe upon freedoms. Edited March 28, 2021 by GoCanucks16 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 Just now, GoCanucks16 said: As I said more succinctly: potential threats do not matter until actualized, unless the basis for that threat is an utterance or act of intimidation from the person we're supposing is a threat, in which case it is quickly a legal issue and not a medical one. A doctor's opinion should be considered worthless when the alternative is to allow that opinion to govern lives and revoke freedom from free persons. I'm going to tap out now. Respectfully, I can't have this convo and I massively disagree with the bolded. Once actualised...it has gone passed potential. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 4 minutes ago, GoCanucks16 said: As I said more succinctly before: potential threats do not matter until actualized, unless the basis for that threat is an utterance or act of intimidation from the person we're supposing is a threat, in which case it is quickly a legal issue and not a medical one. A doctor's opinion should be considered worthless when the alternative is to allow that opinion to govern lives and revoke/infringe upon freedoms. Your life and freedoms are already governed and moreso if you are found to be a threat to yourself or society, based on medical/legal assessments. Society has evolved to this point after trying it the other way as you suggested, because it doesn’t work in keeping people safe. A trained medical/legal opinion is worth far more than a lay person’s opinion when it comes to medical/legal matters. That’s a given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCanucks16 Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said: Your life and freedoms are already governed and moreso if you are found to be a threat to yourself or society, based on medical/legal assessments. Society has evolved to this point after trying it the other way as you suggested, because it doesn’t work in keeping people safe. A trained medical/legal opinion is worth far more than a lay person’s opinion when it comes to medical/legal matters. That’s a given. I disagree. Locking people away under a medical but not criminal basis does not keep the victims of that arrangement safe at all; it robs them of their entire life. Edited March 28, 2021 by GoCanucks16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCanucks16 Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 (edited) 20 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: I'm going to tap out now. Respectfully, I can't have this convo and I massively disagree with the bolded. Once actualised...it has gone passed potential. That's the point. Potential - unless this perceived potential has its basis on a verifiable threat that was uttered or on some type of intimidation such as brandishing a weapon - is not something the state should have any right to act against and is far from actualization. Until there is a criminal basis to strip someone of their freedom of movement, etc., there is not a good enough basis to do so. Edited March 28, 2021 by GoCanucks16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 2 minutes ago, GoCanucks16 said: I disagree. Locking people away under a medical but not criminal basis does not keep the victims of that arrangement safe at all; it robs them of their entire life. There’s a lot of steps/resolutions before locking someone up. Furthermore, even if someone needs to be locked up in most cases it’s not a lock them up and throw away the key situation. However, the legal system must balance the rights of the individual against the rights and safety of the society that individual is a member of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 (edited) 4 minutes ago, GoCanucks16 said: That's the point. Potential - unless this perceived potential has its basis on a verifiable threat that was uttered or on some type of intimidation such as brandishing a weapon - is not something the state should have any right to act against and is far from actualization. Until there is a criminal basis to strip someone of their freedom of movement, security of the person, etc., there is not a good enough basis to do so. Building a bomb in the basement scenario would refute your point, since building a bomb is criminal whether or not any overt threat has been levelled against oneself or others. The ‘potential’ is a risk/threat for harm to the individual and society as is the actualization of detonation. Edited March 28, 2021 by Sharpshooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCanucks16 Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 1 minute ago, Sharpshooter said: Building a bomb in the basement scenario would refute your point, since building a bomb is criminal whether or not any overt threat has been levelled against oneself or others. That's a complete strawman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 Just now, GoCanucks16 said: That's a complete strawman. It’s also a real world scenario that the State has to protect against. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCanucks16 Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 Just now, Sharpshooter said: It’s also a real world scenario that the State has to protect against. I agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 Just now, GoCanucks16 said: I agree? You sure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCanucks16 Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 Just now, Sharpshooter said: You sure? Yes? I don't see how it affects my argument? Obviously criminal offences need to be handled, and it's possible to prove things like conspiracy, etc.? What I'm against is a purely medical view - i.e a doctor's opinion - of an individual mandating that they be placed in hospital settings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 (edited) 4 minutes ago, GoCanucks16 said: Yes? I don't see how it affects my argument? Obviously criminal offences need to be handled, and it's possible to prove things like conspiracy, etc.? What I'm against is a purely medical view - i.e a doctor's opinion - of an individual mandating that they be placed in hospital settings? Allow me to illustrate the parallels: Doctors have the training moreso to separate those most needing separation from society while they are treated to longer be threats to society or themselves which is better for the individual and society as a whole. Edited March 28, 2021 by Sharpshooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCanucks16 Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 4 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said: Allow me to illustrate the parallels: Doctors have the training moreso to separate those most needing separation from society while they are treated to longer be threats to society or themselves which is better for the individual and society as a whole. They really do not. And it does not matter until the individual has committed an offence, at which point they can go to jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted March 28, 2021 Share Posted March 28, 2021 (edited) 18 minutes ago, GoCanucks16 said: They really do not. And it does not matter until the individual has committed an offence, at which point they can go to jail. They do moreso according to the legal system that empowers them to be the best/most trained/authoritative at making assessments that can advise the judiciary when such decisions of social separation must be made. Again, building a bomb without threatening to detonate it, is still a crime. There are plenty of times when someone on the verge of a psychotic episode requires state intervention and then medical assessments, treatment, supervision and then follow up. The safety of society requires this and the state on behalf of society in which that person lives can legally infringe and restrict some of their rights and freedoms. Edited March 28, 2021 by Sharpshooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted March 28, 2021 Author Share Posted March 28, 2021 One of the victims has died...I believe it's a woman (who had a child). Possibly a teacher. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now