Quote:
Originally Posted by ken0042
On the bolded part, I'll flip it back to you. What are the reasons to give him a full unconditional release? That is what he is asking for. If he is being successfully treated with medication, I don't see the harm in having him submit to medical testing on a regular basis to ensure the treatment continues to work.
We take away liberties all the time for medical reasons. After a heart attack people aren't allowed to drive for several months. People prone to seizures also have driving restrictions. Sure- less restrictive than full liberty, but restrictions none the less. All due to the fact that a medical condition increases the risk of injury to others.
He has a medical condition that left untreated caused the death of another person. Let's make sure he continues to get the treatment he needs.
|
I think you're confusing liberty with privileges. Anything to do with driving is a privilege not a right. That's why they can take away your car at a check stop without a conviction. Living without intervention from the state (visits/medical etc) isn't a prvlidge it's your liberty and it has to be taken away and given back by the courts with legal backing.
They can't say "Well look what you did, compared to what could have happened to you these minor restrictions on your life aren't much and are in fact helpful for you so therefore we will leave them on you".