Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
Just becaue cheaper and more convenient ways of dealing with the mentally ill exist does not justify their use.
If someone is truly insane to the point they cannot control themselves and they continue to represent a danger to society, that is the burden of the health system not the criminal one. How do deterrents affect someone who doesn't know what they are doing?
I think the problem is criminal lawyers have stretched what the idea of criminally insane actually means. The line has become so blurred we have people who are insane in jail, and people who are should be found guilty getting off on insanity pleas.
|
You make some good points, but in the end we are discussing the "best" way to deal with an extremely unpleasant situation in the best interests of society. Money is used as an excuse against capital punishment, so turnabout is fairplay. Emotions aside, the best way could very well be execution, but that is a values debate.
It is a failure on the part of both society at large and the health system to not recognize, segregate and treat those with severe, violent mental illness before it gets to the level that people are being brutally murdered. There are many tell-tale signs, and often these are dismissed as "a phase," a case of "boys will be boys," or some other deflecting BS. The most obvious is animal butchery.
There is also the requirement of justice. Yes, the insanity plea has been perverted beyond repair. However, in cases such as this, irreparable damage has been done, and justice must be served. If psychological rehabilitation had a realistic chance of success, great. However, it appears we still lack the ability/technology to adequately do so.
Its really picking off a list of undesirable options, and none really represent a good solution. Emotionally, I don't like it either.