Quote:
Originally Posted by polak
It's not punishment for the sake of punishment. Put him in 5 star hotel for all I care. I just worry about the risks involved by letting him go unsupervised.
That and the optics of letting him go unsupervised so early also is admittedly hard for me to get over. 7 years is not a very long time especially when you consider it probably took some time for him to start responding to treatment.
I geniunely wonder if they expierment with taking him off the medication for an extended period of time and seeing how he reacts. If we stable for an extended period of time without meds I'd feel better as it would give us some time to track him down should he flee before another episode could occur.
|
I think part of the problem is you say everything you're thinking at the moment (not really a problem, but it leads to confusion) and don't realize you're actually proving what others are taking issue with in your posts.
This is an example where you've said you agree with the experts and are not in favor of punishment for the sake of punishment then you follow that up by saying the opposite.
The bolded are the opposite of what you're claiming. You clearly don't trust the experts and have different ideas on how this should be handled from a professional standpoint.
And you admit that "optics" are hard for you to get over and that's part of why this should go on longer, which is punishment for the sake of punishment.
Again, it's fine to have that opinion, but just own it and admit you don't trust the legal system or experts and that you want more punishment for Vincent Li. It's just confusing and awkward how you keep denying the things posters are accusing you of and then typing out essays that prove everyone right.